November 11, 2025 • 21 mins
Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News joins Dave Softy Mahler and Dick Fain to talk about the Big Ten equity deal, UCLA’s move from the Rose Bowl to SoFi Stadium, UW’s loss to Wisconsin, Jedd Fisch’s future on Montlake or elsewhere, and the poor A.P. Poll.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
It's time for a weekly PAC twelve conversation with Senjose
Mercury News reporter John Wilner, brought to you by Simply Seattle.
Our friends at simply Seattle dot com have the most
amazing collection of all things Seattle. Seahawks gear UW had
some the largest selection of sonics gear anywhere in the world.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Learn more at simply Seattle dot com.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
All right, you got your eye on something on the
website you want to bang out of your holiday shopping now.
I'll use code KJR fifteen for fifteen percent off anything
any time.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
Seahawk gear, for the stretch, run.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
Cracking gear, dog gear, whatever, baby simply Seattle dot com
and always, always, always use code KJR fifteen to checkout
for a discount. Here he is the Pope of the pack,
the big ten baron our friend from the San Jose
Mercury News to one and only John Wilner.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Johnny, how are you man? Hey guys, Oh, we're so close,
so close.
Speaker 4 (00:55):
It doesn't happen for twenty minutes.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
Jo on your phone sounds like remember those old Jiffy
pops you put on the oven back in the day,
And then that's what your phone will so your phone
sounds like right now, can.
Speaker 5 (01:04):
You talry about that? I can hear you guys perfectly, Okay, Jackson.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
It could be an US problem. It could be an
US problem on our end. Well, John's with us. John,
We're doing good. Thanks for asking. By the way, So
before we dive into everything happening on the field, man,
there's a lot happening off the field and this Big
Ten equity saga, what's the latest? And it seems like
there's going to be some problems with this with a
few of the member institutions of the Big Ten.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
What's the latest there?
Speaker 6 (01:31):
Well, the latest go through with this deal even if
USC and Michigan are not on board, and that would
create an unprecedented situation in which sixteen schools would be
playing by one set of rules and two would be
playing by another. And part of the deal forgetting this
(01:52):
money is that you have to extend the grant of
rights till twenty forty six. Sixteen teams schools would be
to the Big Ten until twenty forty six.
Speaker 5 (02:02):
Michigan and USC would.
Speaker 6 (02:04):
Only be members until twenty thirty six and then they
would be free agents. And the thing is if USC
and Michigan are free agents. They're gonna have plenty of
offers in twenty thirty six, right, I mean, if the
Big Ten things that they are, they're going to try
to back these two schools into a corner, I think
they're mistaken because they're gonna have.
Speaker 5 (02:23):
Tons of options.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
John, John, let me just backtrack for a second. Sorry,
And I should have done this from the start. Can
we just explain this to people that don't know what's
going on? Reset, give us like thirty forty five seconds
on what exactly this story is all about, and dumb
it down for people like me?
Speaker 2 (02:40):
Please?
Speaker 6 (02:41):
Sure? So the Big Ten is looking into a private
capital infusion of two point four billion dollars, so that
money would be dispersed to the schools on an uneven
basis up front based on tiers. Washington be on the
third tier of revenue. Washington would get one hundred and
(03:03):
ten million, Oregon and USC would get one hundred and
fifty million, Penn State, Ohio, State Michigan get one hundred
and ninety million. The deal would also require the schools
to sign a twenty year grand of rights, basically locking
them together for twenty years, so it would end in
ey chance of a super league. The deal also creates
(03:27):
some they call Big Ten Enterprises, which would become a
for profit commercial arm of the conference to help generate,
you know, as much revenue as possible. Those are kind
of the main three aspects of it. But the biggest
deal is they would bind the schools for twenty years
together in the Big Ten, a lot of them, you know, Minnesota, Purdue.
(03:50):
They're looking for security. They don't want to have State
in Michigan going off and forming a super league, so
that's why they're in favor of this. But if Michigan,
Ohio and USC don't sign on to it and they
go through with it anyhow, two of the biggest brands
in the conference would be free agents halfway through the
twenty year deal.
Speaker 7 (04:11):
So what's better for the conference as far as parody goes.
Do we want to see a more NFL type thing
where there's not a lot of difference between the third
fourth best team and the Big Ten and the fourteenth
fifteenth best team in the Big Ten?
Speaker 4 (04:25):
Or is what's better for the Big Ten.
Speaker 7 (04:26):
To have two or three superpowers in the conference every
year and a lot of teams that stink?
Speaker 6 (04:33):
I mean, that's kind of what they got this year, right,
and that's what it is every year. I mean, Michigan
and Ohio State and Penn State, to you know, over
the course of time, are the three dominant programs. The
thing is, I think this deal would actually create more
of a top heavy league because not only would Ohio State, Michigan,
(04:57):
and Penn State get more upfront cash, They're also going
to create a unequal revenue model for the annual payouts
and those schools would be on top of that as well. Well.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
John Wilner's with us on the radio show.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
The other big story happening off the field is what's
going on with UCLA and the Rolls Bowl. So, I mean,
I guess just explain this again to me like I'm
a more on which I am, so it's going to
be easy. So basically, you dub is playing at the
Rolls Bowl next Saturday versus UCLA. Are you telling me
this is the potential final time that you doub will
ever play a regular season game at the Rose Bowl
next Saturday?
Speaker 5 (05:35):
I think that is possible.
Speaker 6 (05:37):
Yes, UCLA is moving forward as best as it can
to try to deal with Sofi Stadium to move the
home games to so Fi.
Speaker 5 (05:46):
I happen to believe a.
Speaker 6 (05:47):
Lot of this is still leverage now that they want
to get a better term for their lease on the
Rose Bowl and they're using going to Sofi Stadium as
the leverage. The Rose Bowl has sued UCLA to stop
the move, and we'll see. I think it's a very
interesting deal. I think it is completely misguided on the
(06:10):
Bruins side to think that a lot more people are
going to go to Sofi Stadium then we go to
the Rose Bowl. That's preposterous. Part of the appeal is
all the luxury suites at Sofi Stadium, But then again,
how many UCLA fans are going to get those.
Speaker 5 (06:25):
Take those luxury seats.
Speaker 6 (06:26):
I think it would be a terrible deal for UCLA,
And it's so obviously a terrible deal that I think
it's a negotiating ploy.
Speaker 7 (06:34):
John disaster struck at Camp Randall for the Huskies against Wisconsin.
I mean, it was unbelievable, the worst loss since the
Montana game. Why were the Huskies not able to get
over the top when they have before? Every single year
the Huskies face a team and almost lose. We saw
it at Arizona State the year they went to the
college football playoffs. Why weren't they able to get over
the top this time?
Speaker 5 (06:56):
That was atrocious.
Speaker 6 (06:58):
I thought that the biggest problem is their offense, and
it's not just It wasn't just the Wisconsin game.
Speaker 5 (07:04):
That's just the latest example.
Speaker 6 (07:05):
I went back and looked Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin the
second halves of those three games. Washington has scored three
points three points in six quarters, so that is and
they haven't played well on the road in general under
jedfish Right, They've got what one win at Maryland, right,
come back, come back win, and Maryland.
Speaker 5 (07:25):
Clearly is not any good.
Speaker 6 (07:27):
Their only win of the season is over Wisconsin in
Big Ten play. So a lot of it is they
are not very good on offense when they're on the
road and they're facing a decent defense. They got to
figure that out because you know, I know there were
some injuries, but to me, those injuries do not account
for the fact that you lose to Wisconsin, which is awful.
(07:49):
No offense, I mean it was that was really bad.
Speaker 5 (07:53):
That was shockingly bad. From the Austin.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Yes, John, I'm sorry to do this to you, but
I want to go back to the UCLA story. I
appolgejys I should have followed up on that from the beginning.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
But there's two things. I want to just go back
to that for a quick second.
Speaker 3 (08:04):
You said it's a negotiating ploy by UCLA either A
what to get a better deal from the Rose Bull
And do you think it's possible, Okay, do you think
it's possible that UCLA, even if they do move to Sofi,
would do that short term and the long term plan
is eventually to build a smaller stadium on campus or
(08:25):
do you see them actually moving to Sofi and stay
in there forever.
Speaker 6 (08:30):
I do not believe on campus stadium is viable. You know,
if you know UCLA's campus, it's there's not a lot
of room they would make the in theory, what they
do is they take Drake Stadium, which is the track
and field on the northwest corner borders Wilshire and turn
that into a on campus stadium of like forty thousand.
Speaker 5 (08:53):
Here's the problem. All those rich folks.
Speaker 6 (08:56):
In bel Air across Wilshire Boulevard would go Nanas that
is an incredibly powerful neighborhood association with immense amount of resources,
and in my opinion, there is no way they will
let you cla do that on campus team. I think
if they move to Sofi, then they moved to Sofi
(09:16):
and that's it for a long time.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
God, that's amazing, unbelievable.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
Well, John Wilner is with us, and John's go back
to the Huskies again. So you know, Dick mentioned it
disaster striking in Madison over the weekend. You gave us
your thoughts on the home road problems. They've got it.
It was pathetic in a lot of ways by U
dub on Saturday.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
But where does that leave Jedfish?
Speaker 5 (09:38):
Right?
Speaker 3 (09:38):
Because that seems to be the big conversation right now
amongst Husky fans, like where does he go? Where does
udub go from him? And he very well may want
to move on and go somewhere, but losing to Wisconsin
doesn't help him to do that. So I guess my
question is how much do you believe Jedfish wants to
exit Washington. There's been a lot of report from people
(10:00):
saying they believe that. And then number two, if he
does want to exit, can he exit?
Speaker 5 (10:07):
Well?
Speaker 6 (10:07):
I have never thought he was a lot long termer
in Seattle in the first place.
Speaker 5 (10:11):
I mean to me, it was he viewed.
Speaker 6 (10:13):
It as a stepping stone job to get somewhere else
NFL Florida his alma mater, or a premier what he've
uses a better gig in the big ten or sec.
I thought he was a short timer all along, which
was part of the risk in hiring him in the
first place. So to me, I mean, he's got his
eyes out, there's no question he's looking around.
Speaker 5 (10:35):
Now.
Speaker 6 (10:36):
This doesn't help his market value, but I also don't
think it really hurts. I mean, you know, if UCLA
really wants him, then losing the Wisconsin is not Washington.
Losing Wisconsin's not going to prevent the Bruins from going
after him, for instance. What it does is it hurts
him in the market for jobs that he doesn't have
(10:58):
any kind of personal ties to, whether it's Florida or UCLA.
But you know, Washington's need to expect this was going
to happen the moment they hired him, which again was
part of the risk in hiring him. And then they
have his buyoss not very big, so almost any school
is going to be able to afford him if they
want him.
Speaker 7 (11:18):
So what do you make of his comments? A softy
asked him this week. Other people have asked him this week.
Speaker 4 (11:22):
He says he.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
Loves his job here.
Speaker 7 (11:23):
I mean, do you believe anything that come out of
coaches mouths when they answer those type of questions, or
is Jedfish in a little bit of a different bucket
than some other coaches because he has traveled so many.
Speaker 4 (11:36):
Places in such a short time.
Speaker 5 (11:38):
I believe very few of them.
Speaker 6 (11:40):
There are a few instances where I do believe them,
like Kenny Dillingham at ASU. He grew up in Phoenix,
he went to ASU, he lives next door to his sister.
He just signed a contract that is based on longevity
and security. I believe Kenny Dillyham is standing at issue
for a long time, but there's very few cases like that.
I don't believe Jetfish anything he says, why would you?
(12:04):
But I also don't believe most of them.
Speaker 5 (12:05):
I mean, Fish said that same kind of.
Speaker 6 (12:07):
Stuff when when he was at Arizona and I saw
his comment was that yesterday about the lists, like those
people who make the list don't know anything. You know
who makes those lists, the agents, they're who make the list.
And his agent is leaking his name to reporters to
drum up interest so I kind of laughed when he
(12:28):
said the lists are are, you know, basically irrelevant because
they're coming from agents.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Well, what do you think happens?
Speaker 3 (12:36):
Honestly, if you had to put any significant amount of
money on this thing, for what Jetfish does when the
year is over, And obviously it depends in a lot
of ways on how this year goes for Washington. Right,
if thinking rally and finish with ten wins and beat
Oregon and you win a ballgame, his resume looks a
lot stronger.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
So what does your gut tell you Jed Fish is
doing next year?
Speaker 6 (12:55):
Well, my gut tells me that they're going to lose
to the Ducks and that they may also lose to UCLA.
I mean, I don't know why you trust them on
the road. They can't win on the road, So I
think they go there's a real chance they could lose
to UCLA. I think the only viable place. I really
don't think Florida is an option. Was what my bet
(13:17):
tells me. And so it's pretty much Ucla or staying
in Seattle. If I were betting, I would probably bet
he's back in Seattle for next season.
Speaker 7 (13:28):
If they were to lose those two games and even
win a bowl game and finish eight and five. I mean,
is that a step in the right direction just because
it's two wins more than last year, or is that
a massive disappointment?
Speaker 6 (13:44):
I would say, I mean for Husky fans, I would
think would be viewed as a big disappointment given where
they were.
Speaker 5 (13:50):
If you had told me before.
Speaker 6 (13:51):
The season, they're going to go seven and five and
then win a bowl game, I'd have thought, Yeah, I
could see that. That might have been slightly on the
low end of what I I would have expected, but
it was certainly a reasonable range. But if you're a
Washington fan and you watched them play so well in
so many games early and that they're six and two
and they're thinking about maybe sneaking into the playoff, and
(14:12):
then they finish eight and five, it'd be a pretty
big disappointment.
Speaker 5 (14:15):
I would think, yeah.
Speaker 3 (14:17):
I mean, I guess in that context, I could see it.
Do we allow ourselves to look at it? John, And
I guess, I don't know. Maybe this is just you know,
one perspective, right, I'm looking at it through one lens
and you're looking at it through a different lens, and
that is the lens of what he took over a
year and a half ago when the roster got blown
to bits. Was it really realistic in February of twenty
(14:37):
twenty four that in year two he was going to
make the College Football Playoff? And if I would have
told you in February of twenty four that in year
two he's going to be nine and three and their
second year in the Big Ten after the roster got
blown to Kingdom, come, would you have looked at that
at that point as real progress.
Speaker 5 (14:56):
Yeah? I thought all.
Speaker 6 (14:57):
Along if if that would be real progres and if
I were a Washington fan and they finished date in five,
I think, you know what that's I'm a little disappointed,
but I can see the trajectory here, and I'm encouraged
about what I've seen, and I'm ready for next year.
And then next year they need to be winning nine
or ten games. But I don't really like, as an
(15:17):
objective observer, I don't really see that there's a big
problem with where things are going.
Speaker 5 (15:24):
Even if they do lose two more, I think on the.
Speaker 6 (15:27):
Against the broad canvas of what you could have reasonably expected,
they're doing fine.
Speaker 7 (15:33):
John Softy has long asked for a sarcasm font on Twitter.
We have not gotten one yet, So I want to
know if this tweet by John Wilner last night deserves
the sarcasm font or if it's authentic, said, the AP
Top twenty five is so meaningless that this platform has
been bombarded all season with complaints about the Bowl. Yep,
it's totally irrelevant. Nobody cares. Why does the AP even bother?
(15:56):
Do we need a sarcasm font on that? Or is
that authentic?
Speaker 6 (16:00):
You need sarcasm in the biggest, boldest funt you could find.
That's I'm getting a kick out of it because there's
been so many complaints about the AP poll on Twitter
all season about how it's meaningless. Well, then why is
everybody talking about it every week and complaining about it?
Obviously it's not meaningless, and I can assure.
Speaker 5 (16:20):
You that there's no chance.
Speaker 6 (16:23):
The AP is going to get rid of the poll
and it sees how much reaction it's getting.
Speaker 5 (16:28):
No.
Speaker 2 (16:28):
Well, first of all, I can answer all those questions
for you if you'd like.
Speaker 5 (16:31):
I mean, I know what you're in.
Speaker 3 (16:33):
I have responses every single one. First of all, the
reason why people talk about the AP pole the way
they do is because up until last week, it.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Was the only poll.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
All Right, nobody looks at the coaches poll because the
coaches poll is sid's voting, and coaches have no idea
what the hell they're doing. So up until last week,
until last Tuesday, it was the only poll we had.
It's less relevant now for conversation because the CFP is
now officially out for the second consecutive week. Came out,
as Dick said about a half an hour ago. However,
(17:03):
I think the reason why people threw a fit about
this week's eight peo pole is because the Oregon Ducks
went to Iowa beat Iowa Ole miss host of Citadel,
and these two teams fliped.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Spots in the AP. How does that happen? And how
do you sleep at.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
Night working for an organization like that?
Speaker 5 (17:24):
That's That's one I can't explain.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
I moved to Oregon out for sure, I.
Speaker 6 (17:30):
Cannot explain a lot of the stuff that happens in
the a people I can't explain. And there's certainly I
get plenty of criticism for some of my votes, Like
right now, I'm getting criticized for where I have textas
relative to Vanderbilt and Oklahoma and you know what, that's
I have my own way of doing it, and I
have to think that losing the Florida is a terrible
(17:52):
loss for Texas.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
Uh.
Speaker 6 (17:54):
But you know, everybody has their own unique way of
doing it, and there's going to be discrepancies and quirks
in their polls. The one thing that is tough for
me to swallow is when there's ballots that are based
on people not being in voters not being informed of
the results. That bothers me as a voter.
Speaker 7 (18:15):
John Should a team be able to change a player's
number and disguise him as a punter like USC did
with Sam Hewart on Friday?
Speaker 6 (18:22):
What I want to know is why didn't USC save
that for the Oregon game?
Speaker 4 (18:25):
That was a good point point.
Speaker 6 (18:27):
Why would you use it when you're in a game
you're gonna win. So the bottom line.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
On that is it was a penalty.
Speaker 6 (18:35):
What should have happened is the Trujan should have been
assessed a fifteen yard penalty when their actual punter came
out on the field later in the game, because you
can't have two players that play the same position were
the same number. So Sam Hewart comes out there in
eighty and they do the fake punt, fine, but the
moment the other punter comes out wearing eighty, that's when
(18:57):
the violation occurs.
Speaker 5 (18:59):
So that is technically that's the rule. They're going to
get this.
Speaker 6 (19:02):
I'm a little surprised there wasn't like a mid week change,
you know how. Sometimes they'll do a midwek change and
then caa rules because of a loophole, like they did
last year. I think with Oregon and Ohio State and
the eleven or the twelve man on the field, they'll
get that cleared up, I think over the off season.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
But it was a violation by USA presee, cheating Trojan
bastards is what they are, and they got Well, yes.
Speaker 6 (19:27):
You could say that, but I'm going to get back
to our first topic. UFC is trying to save the
Big ten from a gigantic mistake, and if they succeed
at Washington, Pens should be thanking the Trojans right because
Washington is one of those schools that I just I'm
having a hard time wrapping my arms around what they're doing.
Speaker 3 (19:45):
Interesting. All right, well we'll dig more into that and
get back to you next week. All right, you're on fire,
my friend.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
You got it.
Speaker 3 (19:50):
Again, Iowa plus the points against the Ducks seven and
four on the air, three and one your last four
Willner's winner. The Windalorean has again the proper path. He
is walking the straight line, and he is on his
way to another winning season.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
Let's not veer off. Okay, let's not slip up.
Speaker 3 (20:10):
Let's not be convinced to go the wrong way when
the right way has been working so well, John, what
do you got this week for us?
Speaker 6 (20:17):
I'm actually I'm going with the Huskies because they're good
at home, and they're very good at home against bad
teams and produce bad and the last line I saw.
Speaker 5 (20:29):
Was sixteen and a half. That's still okay?
Speaker 6 (20:32):
Yeah, absolutely, I mean, I mean, Illinois is way better
than Perdue.
Speaker 5 (20:38):
You could argue Rutgers.
Speaker 6 (20:39):
Is even better than Perdue. And the Huskies stumped the vote.
So to me, this is like thirty eight ten or
something like that.
Speaker 2 (20:45):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:45):
I wonder if this is one of those games where
if the Huskies don't win big, we're gonna have a
problem on yeah Monday, right, Yeah, all right, John, great stuff,
enjoy the weekend, and we'll talk next Tuesday.
Speaker 6 (20:55):
Man, thanks a lot, guys, All right, John.
Speaker 2 (20:58):
Wilder likes you Dub.
Speaker 3 (20:59):
Minus the points against Perdudo, We'll get a break a
lot more to get to Husky basketball. Tough fut game
Sunday Night. Right with Baylor Dick on Sunday Night, we
can talk about that. Hawks and Rams on Sunday Demand Williams,
Demand Gonna hear from him in the six pm hour
before cracking hockey UH at six point thirty on ninety
three to three KJRFM
It's time for a weekly PAC twelve conversation with Senjose
Mercury News reporter John Wilner, brought to you by Simply Seattle.
Our friends at simply Seattle dot com have the most
amazing collection of all things Seattle. Seahawks gear UW had
some the largest selection of sonics gear anywhere in the world.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Learn more at simply Seattle dot com.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
All right, you got your eye on something on the
website you want to bang out of your holiday shopping now.
I'll use code KJR fifteen for fifteen percent off anything
any time.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
Seahawk gear, for the stretch, run.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
Cracking gear, dog gear, whatever, baby simply Seattle dot com
and always, always, always use code KJR fifteen to checkout
for a discount. Here he is the Pope of the pack,
the big ten baron our friend from the San Jose
Mercury News to one and only John Wilner.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Johnny, how are you man? Hey guys, Oh, we're so close,
so close.
Speaker 4 (00:55):
It doesn't happen for twenty minutes.
Speaker 3 (00:56):
Jo on your phone sounds like remember those old Jiffy
pops you put on the oven back in the day,
And then that's what your phone will so your phone
sounds like right now, can.
Speaker 5 (01:04):
You talry about that? I can hear you guys perfectly, Okay, Jackson.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
It could be an US problem. It could be an
US problem on our end. Well, John's with us. John,
We're doing good. Thanks for asking. By the way, So
before we dive into everything happening on the field, man,
there's a lot happening off the field and this Big
Ten equity saga, what's the latest? And it seems like
there's going to be some problems with this with a
few of the member institutions of the Big Ten.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
What's the latest there?
Speaker 6 (01:31):
Well, the latest go through with this deal even if
USC and Michigan are not on board, and that would
create an unprecedented situation in which sixteen schools would be
playing by one set of rules and two would be
playing by another. And part of the deal forgetting this
(01:52):
money is that you have to extend the grant of
rights till twenty forty six. Sixteen teams schools would be
to the Big Ten until twenty forty six.
Speaker 5 (02:02):
Michigan and USC would.
Speaker 6 (02:04):
Only be members until twenty thirty six and then they
would be free agents. And the thing is if USC
and Michigan are free agents. They're gonna have plenty of
offers in twenty thirty six, right, I mean, if the
Big Ten things that they are, they're going to try
to back these two schools into a corner, I think
they're mistaken because they're gonna have.
Speaker 5 (02:23):
Tons of options.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
John, John, let me just backtrack for a second. Sorry,
And I should have done this from the start. Can
we just explain this to people that don't know what's
going on? Reset, give us like thirty forty five seconds
on what exactly this story is all about, and dumb
it down for people like me?
Speaker 2 (02:40):
Please?
Speaker 6 (02:41):
Sure? So the Big Ten is looking into a private
capital infusion of two point four billion dollars, so that
money would be dispersed to the schools on an uneven
basis up front based on tiers. Washington be on the
third tier of revenue. Washington would get one hundred and
(03:03):
ten million, Oregon and USC would get one hundred and
fifty million, Penn State, Ohio, State Michigan get one hundred
and ninety million. The deal would also require the schools
to sign a twenty year grand of rights, basically locking
them together for twenty years, so it would end in
ey chance of a super league. The deal also creates
(03:27):
some they call Big Ten Enterprises, which would become a
for profit commercial arm of the conference to help generate,
you know, as much revenue as possible. Those are kind
of the main three aspects of it. But the biggest
deal is they would bind the schools for twenty years
together in the Big Ten, a lot of them, you know, Minnesota, Purdue.
(03:50):
They're looking for security. They don't want to have State
in Michigan going off and forming a super league, so
that's why they're in favor of this. But if Michigan,
Ohio and USC don't sign on to it and they
go through with it anyhow, two of the biggest brands
in the conference would be free agents halfway through the
twenty year deal.
Speaker 7 (04:11):
So what's better for the conference as far as parody goes.
Do we want to see a more NFL type thing
where there's not a lot of difference between the third
fourth best team and the Big Ten and the fourteenth
fifteenth best team in the Big Ten?
Speaker 4 (04:25):
Or is what's better for the Big Ten.
Speaker 7 (04:26):
To have two or three superpowers in the conference every
year and a lot of teams that stink?
Speaker 6 (04:33):
I mean, that's kind of what they got this year, right,
and that's what it is every year. I mean, Michigan
and Ohio State and Penn State, to you know, over
the course of time, are the three dominant programs. The
thing is, I think this deal would actually create more
of a top heavy league because not only would Ohio State, Michigan,
(04:57):
and Penn State get more upfront cash, They're also going
to create a unequal revenue model for the annual payouts
and those schools would be on top of that as well. Well.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
John Wilner's with us on the radio show.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
The other big story happening off the field is what's
going on with UCLA and the Rolls Bowl. So, I mean,
I guess just explain this again to me like I'm
a more on which I am, so it's going to
be easy. So basically, you dub is playing at the
Rolls Bowl next Saturday versus UCLA. Are you telling me
this is the potential final time that you doub will
ever play a regular season game at the Rose Bowl
next Saturday?
Speaker 5 (05:35):
I think that is possible.
Speaker 6 (05:37):
Yes, UCLA is moving forward as best as it can
to try to deal with Sofi Stadium to move the
home games to so Fi.
Speaker 5 (05:46):
I happen to believe a.
Speaker 6 (05:47):
Lot of this is still leverage now that they want
to get a better term for their lease on the
Rose Bowl and they're using going to Sofi Stadium as
the leverage. The Rose Bowl has sued UCLA to stop
the move, and we'll see. I think it's a very
interesting deal. I think it is completely misguided on the
(06:10):
Bruins side to think that a lot more people are
going to go to Sofi Stadium then we go to
the Rose Bowl. That's preposterous. Part of the appeal is
all the luxury suites at Sofi Stadium, But then again,
how many UCLA fans are going to get those.
Speaker 5 (06:25):
Take those luxury seats.
Speaker 6 (06:26):
I think it would be a terrible deal for UCLA,
And it's so obviously a terrible deal that I think
it's a negotiating ploy.
Speaker 7 (06:34):
John disaster struck at Camp Randall for the Huskies against Wisconsin.
I mean, it was unbelievable, the worst loss since the
Montana game. Why were the Huskies not able to get
over the top when they have before? Every single year
the Huskies face a team and almost lose. We saw
it at Arizona State the year they went to the
college football playoffs. Why weren't they able to get over
the top this time?
Speaker 5 (06:56):
That was atrocious.
Speaker 6 (06:58):
I thought that the biggest problem is their offense, and
it's not just It wasn't just the Wisconsin game.
Speaker 5 (07:04):
That's just the latest example.
Speaker 6 (07:05):
I went back and looked Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin the
second halves of those three games. Washington has scored three
points three points in six quarters, so that is and
they haven't played well on the road in general under
jedfish Right, They've got what one win at Maryland, right,
come back, come back win, and Maryland.
Speaker 5 (07:25):
Clearly is not any good.
Speaker 6 (07:27):
Their only win of the season is over Wisconsin in
Big Ten play. So a lot of it is they
are not very good on offense when they're on the
road and they're facing a decent defense. They got to
figure that out because you know, I know there were
some injuries, but to me, those injuries do not account
for the fact that you lose to Wisconsin, which is awful.
(07:49):
No offense, I mean it was that was really bad.
Speaker 5 (07:53):
That was shockingly bad. From the Austin.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Yes, John, I'm sorry to do this to you, but
I want to go back to the UCLA story. I
appolgejys I should have followed up on that from the beginning.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
But there's two things. I want to just go back
to that for a quick second.
Speaker 3 (08:04):
You said it's a negotiating ploy by UCLA either A
what to get a better deal from the Rose Bull
And do you think it's possible, Okay, do you think
it's possible that UCLA, even if they do move to Sofi,
would do that short term and the long term plan
is eventually to build a smaller stadium on campus or
(08:25):
do you see them actually moving to Sofi and stay
in there forever.
Speaker 6 (08:30):
I do not believe on campus stadium is viable. You know,
if you know UCLA's campus, it's there's not a lot
of room they would make the in theory, what they
do is they take Drake Stadium, which is the track
and field on the northwest corner borders Wilshire and turn
that into a on campus stadium of like forty thousand.
Speaker 5 (08:53):
Here's the problem. All those rich folks.
Speaker 6 (08:56):
In bel Air across Wilshire Boulevard would go Nanas that
is an incredibly powerful neighborhood association with immense amount of resources,
and in my opinion, there is no way they will
let you cla do that on campus team. I think
if they move to Sofi, then they moved to Sofi
(09:16):
and that's it for a long time.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
God, that's amazing, unbelievable.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
Well, John Wilner is with us, and John's go back
to the Huskies again. So you know, Dick mentioned it
disaster striking in Madison over the weekend. You gave us
your thoughts on the home road problems. They've got it.
It was pathetic in a lot of ways by U
dub on Saturday.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
But where does that leave Jedfish?
Speaker 5 (09:38):
Right?
Speaker 3 (09:38):
Because that seems to be the big conversation right now
amongst Husky fans, like where does he go? Where does
udub go from him? And he very well may want
to move on and go somewhere, but losing to Wisconsin
doesn't help him to do that. So I guess my
question is how much do you believe Jedfish wants to
exit Washington. There's been a lot of report from people
(10:00):
saying they believe that. And then number two, if he
does want to exit, can he exit?
Speaker 5 (10:07):
Well?
Speaker 6 (10:07):
I have never thought he was a lot long termer
in Seattle in the first place.
Speaker 5 (10:11):
I mean to me, it was he viewed.
Speaker 6 (10:13):
It as a stepping stone job to get somewhere else
NFL Florida his alma mater, or a premier what he've
uses a better gig in the big ten or sec.
I thought he was a short timer all along, which
was part of the risk in hiring him in the
first place. So to me, I mean, he's got his
eyes out, there's no question he's looking around.
Speaker 5 (10:35):
Now.
Speaker 6 (10:36):
This doesn't help his market value, but I also don't
think it really hurts. I mean, you know, if UCLA
really wants him, then losing the Wisconsin is not Washington.
Losing Wisconsin's not going to prevent the Bruins from going
after him, for instance. What it does is it hurts
him in the market for jobs that he doesn't have
(10:58):
any kind of personal ties to, whether it's Florida or UCLA.
But you know, Washington's need to expect this was going
to happen the moment they hired him, which again was
part of the risk in hiring him. And then they
have his buyoss not very big, so almost any school
is going to be able to afford him if they
want him.
Speaker 7 (11:18):
So what do you make of his comments? A softy
asked him this week. Other people have asked him this week.
Speaker 4 (11:22):
He says he.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
Loves his job here.
Speaker 7 (11:23):
I mean, do you believe anything that come out of
coaches mouths when they answer those type of questions, or
is Jedfish in a little bit of a different bucket
than some other coaches because he has traveled so many.
Speaker 4 (11:36):
Places in such a short time.
Speaker 5 (11:38):
I believe very few of them.
Speaker 6 (11:40):
There are a few instances where I do believe them,
like Kenny Dillingham at ASU. He grew up in Phoenix,
he went to ASU, he lives next door to his sister.
He just signed a contract that is based on longevity
and security. I believe Kenny Dillyham is standing at issue
for a long time, but there's very few cases like that.
I don't believe Jetfish anything he says, why would you?
(12:04):
But I also don't believe most of them.
Speaker 5 (12:05):
I mean, Fish said that same kind of.
Speaker 6 (12:07):
Stuff when when he was at Arizona and I saw
his comment was that yesterday about the lists, like those
people who make the list don't know anything. You know
who makes those lists, the agents, they're who make the list.
And his agent is leaking his name to reporters to
drum up interest so I kind of laughed when he
(12:28):
said the lists are are, you know, basically irrelevant because
they're coming from agents.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Well, what do you think happens?
Speaker 3 (12:36):
Honestly, if you had to put any significant amount of
money on this thing, for what Jetfish does when the
year is over, And obviously it depends in a lot
of ways on how this year goes for Washington. Right,
if thinking rally and finish with ten wins and beat
Oregon and you win a ballgame, his resume looks a
lot stronger.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
So what does your gut tell you Jed Fish is
doing next year?
Speaker 6 (12:55):
Well, my gut tells me that they're going to lose
to the Ducks and that they may also lose to UCLA.
I mean, I don't know why you trust them on
the road. They can't win on the road, So I
think they go there's a real chance they could lose
to UCLA. I think the only viable place. I really
don't think Florida is an option. Was what my bet
(13:17):
tells me. And so it's pretty much Ucla or staying
in Seattle. If I were betting, I would probably bet
he's back in Seattle for next season.
Speaker 7 (13:28):
If they were to lose those two games and even
win a bowl game and finish eight and five. I mean,
is that a step in the right direction just because
it's two wins more than last year, or is that
a massive disappointment?
Speaker 6 (13:44):
I would say, I mean for Husky fans, I would
think would be viewed as a big disappointment given where
they were.
Speaker 5 (13:50):
If you had told me before.
Speaker 6 (13:51):
The season, they're going to go seven and five and
then win a bowl game, I'd have thought, Yeah, I
could see that. That might have been slightly on the
low end of what I I would have expected, but
it was certainly a reasonable range. But if you're a
Washington fan and you watched them play so well in
so many games early and that they're six and two
and they're thinking about maybe sneaking into the playoff, and
(14:12):
then they finish eight and five, it'd be a pretty
big disappointment.
Speaker 5 (14:15):
I would think, yeah.
Speaker 3 (14:17):
I mean, I guess in that context, I could see it.
Do we allow ourselves to look at it? John, And
I guess, I don't know. Maybe this is just you know,
one perspective, right, I'm looking at it through one lens
and you're looking at it through a different lens, and
that is the lens of what he took over a
year and a half ago when the roster got blown
to bits. Was it really realistic in February of twenty
(14:37):
twenty four that in year two he was going to
make the College Football Playoff? And if I would have
told you in February of twenty four that in year
two he's going to be nine and three and their
second year in the Big Ten after the roster got
blown to Kingdom, come, would you have looked at that
at that point as real progress.
Speaker 5 (14:56):
Yeah? I thought all.
Speaker 6 (14:57):
Along if if that would be real progres and if
I were a Washington fan and they finished date in five,
I think, you know what that's I'm a little disappointed,
but I can see the trajectory here, and I'm encouraged
about what I've seen, and I'm ready for next year.
And then next year they need to be winning nine
or ten games. But I don't really like, as an
(15:17):
objective observer, I don't really see that there's a big
problem with where things are going.
Speaker 5 (15:24):
Even if they do lose two more, I think on the.
Speaker 6 (15:27):
Against the broad canvas of what you could have reasonably expected,
they're doing fine.
Speaker 7 (15:33):
John Softy has long asked for a sarcasm font on Twitter.
We have not gotten one yet, So I want to
know if this tweet by John Wilner last night deserves
the sarcasm font or if it's authentic, said, the AP
Top twenty five is so meaningless that this platform has
been bombarded all season with complaints about the Bowl. Yep,
it's totally irrelevant. Nobody cares. Why does the AP even bother?
(15:56):
Do we need a sarcasm font on that? Or is
that authentic?
Speaker 6 (16:00):
You need sarcasm in the biggest, boldest funt you could find.
That's I'm getting a kick out of it because there's
been so many complaints about the AP poll on Twitter
all season about how it's meaningless. Well, then why is
everybody talking about it every week and complaining about it?
Obviously it's not meaningless, and I can assure.
Speaker 5 (16:20):
You that there's no chance.
Speaker 6 (16:23):
The AP is going to get rid of the poll
and it sees how much reaction it's getting.
Speaker 5 (16:28):
No.
Speaker 2 (16:28):
Well, first of all, I can answer all those questions
for you if you'd like.
Speaker 5 (16:31):
I mean, I know what you're in.
Speaker 3 (16:33):
I have responses every single one. First of all, the
reason why people talk about the AP pole the way
they do is because up until last week, it.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Was the only poll.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
All Right, nobody looks at the coaches poll because the
coaches poll is sid's voting, and coaches have no idea
what the hell they're doing. So up until last week,
until last Tuesday, it was the only poll we had.
It's less relevant now for conversation because the CFP is
now officially out for the second consecutive week. Came out,
as Dick said about a half an hour ago. However,
(17:03):
I think the reason why people threw a fit about
this week's eight peo pole is because the Oregon Ducks
went to Iowa beat Iowa Ole miss host of Citadel,
and these two teams fliped.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Spots in the AP. How does that happen? And how
do you sleep at.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
Night working for an organization like that?
Speaker 5 (17:24):
That's That's one I can't explain.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
I moved to Oregon out for sure, I.
Speaker 6 (17:30):
Cannot explain a lot of the stuff that happens in
the a people I can't explain. And there's certainly I
get plenty of criticism for some of my votes, Like
right now, I'm getting criticized for where I have textas
relative to Vanderbilt and Oklahoma and you know what, that's
I have my own way of doing it, and I
have to think that losing the Florida is a terrible
(17:52):
loss for Texas.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
Uh.
Speaker 6 (17:54):
But you know, everybody has their own unique way of
doing it, and there's going to be discrepancies and quirks
in their polls. The one thing that is tough for
me to swallow is when there's ballots that are based
on people not being in voters not being informed of
the results. That bothers me as a voter.
Speaker 7 (18:15):
John Should a team be able to change a player's
number and disguise him as a punter like USC did
with Sam Hewart on Friday?
Speaker 6 (18:22):
What I want to know is why didn't USC save
that for the Oregon game?
Speaker 4 (18:25):
That was a good point point.
Speaker 6 (18:27):
Why would you use it when you're in a game
you're gonna win. So the bottom line.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
On that is it was a penalty.
Speaker 6 (18:35):
What should have happened is the Trujan should have been
assessed a fifteen yard penalty when their actual punter came
out on the field later in the game, because you
can't have two players that play the same position were
the same number. So Sam Hewart comes out there in
eighty and they do the fake punt, fine, but the
moment the other punter comes out wearing eighty, that's when
(18:57):
the violation occurs.
Speaker 5 (18:59):
So that is technically that's the rule. They're going to
get this.
Speaker 6 (19:02):
I'm a little surprised there wasn't like a mid week change,
you know how. Sometimes they'll do a midwek change and
then caa rules because of a loophole, like they did
last year. I think with Oregon and Ohio State and
the eleven or the twelve man on the field, they'll
get that cleared up, I think over the off season.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
But it was a violation by USA presee, cheating Trojan
bastards is what they are, and they got Well, yes.
Speaker 6 (19:27):
You could say that, but I'm going to get back
to our first topic. UFC is trying to save the
Big ten from a gigantic mistake, and if they succeed
at Washington, Pens should be thanking the Trojans right because
Washington is one of those schools that I just I'm
having a hard time wrapping my arms around what they're doing.
Speaker 3 (19:45):
Interesting. All right, well we'll dig more into that and
get back to you next week. All right, you're on fire,
my friend.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
You got it.
Speaker 3 (19:50):
Again, Iowa plus the points against the Ducks seven and
four on the air, three and one your last four
Willner's winner. The Windalorean has again the proper path. He
is walking the straight line, and he is on his
way to another winning season.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
Let's not veer off. Okay, let's not slip up.
Speaker 3 (20:10):
Let's not be convinced to go the wrong way when
the right way has been working so well, John, what
do you got this week for us?
Speaker 6 (20:17):
I'm actually I'm going with the Huskies because they're good
at home, and they're very good at home against bad
teams and produce bad and the last line I saw.
Speaker 5 (20:29):
Was sixteen and a half. That's still okay?
Speaker 6 (20:32):
Yeah, absolutely, I mean, I mean, Illinois is way better
than Perdue.
Speaker 5 (20:38):
You could argue Rutgers.
Speaker 6 (20:39):
Is even better than Perdue. And the Huskies stumped the vote.
So to me, this is like thirty eight ten or
something like that.
Speaker 2 (20:45):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:45):
I wonder if this is one of those games where
if the Huskies don't win big, we're gonna have a
problem on yeah Monday, right, Yeah, all right, John, great stuff,
enjoy the weekend, and we'll talk next Tuesday.
Speaker 6 (20:55):
Man, thanks a lot, guys, All right, John.
Speaker 2 (20:58):
Wilder likes you Dub.
Speaker 3 (20:59):
Minus the points against Perdudo, We'll get a break a
lot more to get to Husky basketball. Tough fut game
Sunday Night. Right with Baylor Dick on Sunday Night, we
can talk about that. Hawks and Rams on Sunday Demand Williams,
Demand Gonna hear from him in the six pm hour
before cracking hockey UH at six point thirty on ninety
three to three KJRFM
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.