I had a one-on-one with him this morning. I think chief operating officer Patrick Norton and Fitts had the primary call on the Pac-12 situation, but obviously Harris was intimately involved as well. Here's the transcript:
What were the overriding factors in Tulane deciding not to take the Pac-12 offer?
"For us, you look at several factors when you're considering an opportunity. Institutional alignment is certainly an important consideration. You look at the financial piece of it, whether that's distributions that are projected to come from the conference or exit fees that you have to pay to leave your current conference. You look at geography and what would it really take for all of your teams to be able to participate in the conference that you're looking at. Obviously in this case you're talking about the west coast. You're talking that there is fairly significant travel, especially for your sports that are not typically chartering the way that a football and a basketball would charter. Then you also look at overall stability of the league. Most of the time when you see these situations, it is an established league that is in existence right now and ultimately is looking to add members, so the overall stability is not really in question; they are just trying to figure out where they want to go with adding new members. But in this case, you've got to look at what are the future prospects of this league that's really just resurrecting and going forward whether or not you feel it is going to continue to be stable and grow and prosper over the next several years. And then you have to consider things like media contracts, which again when you're talking about a league that's just trying to get itself off the ground, the lack of having something like that is something you have to consider because you're dealing with information that often times is speculation. You don't have any guarantees about exactly what it's going to be."
It's been described as a catch-22 situation where the Pac-12 was promising revenue that could not be realized without the four AAC teams joining it with no media rights deal in place and the schools needing proof that the money would be there before joining the Pac-12. Do you agree with that?
"Right, it was all speculation from the very beginning, so you have to determine to what extent are you comfortable operating in that space, to what extent are you willing to make a move based on what they are projecting may happen, and as you said, based on certain institutions joining the conference. There was just a tremendous amount of uncertainty, so when you're in a situation where you feel like you're a member of a strong conference and you're heading in the right direction and you have great leadership and we've been able to be successful, you have to look in the mirror and say what it is about this situation that's based largely on speculation that you think is a better opportunity than the one that you're enjoying now."
There have been multiple reports the Pac-12 offered to cover only $2.5 million of the exit fees for the AAC teams. Can you verify that?
"I'm going to choose not to. As they were sharing information with us, they asked us to operate with some degree of confidentiality. I would just say we know there is a significant exit fee that would be involved for us if we were to decide to leave."
Would the exit fee have been close to the $25 million SMU paid?
"I don't know that we even had any conversations with the commissioner of OK, if we decide to do this, it's going to be $25 million like SMU's, is it going to be less, is it going to be more. If I'm sitting in Tim Pernetti's shoes, I'm certainly thinking about what do I need to do to protect the conference, so the degree to which you would be looking at something significantly less than that is certainly questionable. As I said, we never got to a point where we were having those conversations with the AAC, but I did keep $25 million in mind as being the fee that the last institution paid, so if we were looking to make a departure, figuring that it was going to be in that approximate range."
Multiple message board peeps of mine (OK, I didn't actually word it that way) have said ESPN has a look-in to its media rights package with the AAC in 2026 and can adjust the amount it is paying the league. Is that accurate?
"Yes, my understanding and the commissioner was talking to us and he'd be the best person to give you the details, but I believe that's coming up in 2026 where there is an opportunity to make those adjustments."
How comfortable do you feel with where the AAC is?
"Very comfortable. At a time when I had a chance to meet and talk with the commissioner, which has been quite a bit over the past couple of weeks. We were talking on a fairly regular basis, but then it really got accelerated about two weeks ago, so it feels like we've had conversations every day, and so even before now I've really been comfortable with his vision for the conference, with how aggressive he wants to be to try to pursue opportunities for revenue enhancement for the league. He wants to look under every rock. He wants to explore every situation. He's been really good and open and he has shared information and he has communicated on a regular basis. Many times an organization is going to rise and fall on its leadership, and I think with him we have a strong leader in that position. I felt very strong about the AAC coming into this (AD) position. It's one of the reasons that I felt comfortable making the move. Mike Aresco was still in the position, but as the transition has happened and Tim has gotten into the chair, it's just really strengthened my feelings about what our future can possibly be."
How important was it that nobody left the league?
"That was something we talked about as athletic directors and the presidents had a chance in our conversation as we all had an opportunity to be able to weigh what was being put on the table. We felt that because none of us were seriously looking to accept and pursue what was being put in front of us, it presented an opportunity for us to put forward a show of unity and strength that you don't typically see in college athletics anymore. It feels like most of the time, most institutions when they're in these situations, it's kind of every school for itself. I was really impressed that almost from the very beginning, my phone began to ring with calls from the other ADs in the league to talk about the opportunity and to get our feelings and to try to see if we were on different pages or the same page, and I was really tremendously impressed with the way we were all able to come together and talk and really come to the same conclusion after looking at the information, even to the point that as things really came to a head this past Monday, I know that many of us were all together physically in Washington D.C. at the time at the LEAD1, now FBS athletic diector association meetings, so we were able to literally be in front of each other and have conversations and meet in person and just make sure that we were all on the same page. I think for all of us it became important that if we were looking at considering anything, that doing something that would possibly involve the other schools was an important consideration from the very beginning of our conversations."
What were the overriding factors in Tulane deciding not to take the Pac-12 offer?
"For us, you look at several factors when you're considering an opportunity. Institutional alignment is certainly an important consideration. You look at the financial piece of it, whether that's distributions that are projected to come from the conference or exit fees that you have to pay to leave your current conference. You look at geography and what would it really take for all of your teams to be able to participate in the conference that you're looking at. Obviously in this case you're talking about the west coast. You're talking that there is fairly significant travel, especially for your sports that are not typically chartering the way that a football and a basketball would charter. Then you also look at overall stability of the league. Most of the time when you see these situations, it is an established league that is in existence right now and ultimately is looking to add members, so the overall stability is not really in question; they are just trying to figure out where they want to go with adding new members. But in this case, you've got to look at what are the future prospects of this league that's really just resurrecting and going forward whether or not you feel it is going to continue to be stable and grow and prosper over the next several years. And then you have to consider things like media contracts, which again when you're talking about a league that's just trying to get itself off the ground, the lack of having something like that is something you have to consider because you're dealing with information that often times is speculation. You don't have any guarantees about exactly what it's going to be."
It's been described as a catch-22 situation where the Pac-12 was promising revenue that could not be realized without the four AAC teams joining it with no media rights deal in place and the schools needing proof that the money would be there before joining the Pac-12. Do you agree with that?
"Right, it was all speculation from the very beginning, so you have to determine to what extent are you comfortable operating in that space, to what extent are you willing to make a move based on what they are projecting may happen, and as you said, based on certain institutions joining the conference. There was just a tremendous amount of uncertainty, so when you're in a situation where you feel like you're a member of a strong conference and you're heading in the right direction and you have great leadership and we've been able to be successful, you have to look in the mirror and say what it is about this situation that's based largely on speculation that you think is a better opportunity than the one that you're enjoying now."
There have been multiple reports the Pac-12 offered to cover only $2.5 million of the exit fees for the AAC teams. Can you verify that?
"I'm going to choose not to. As they were sharing information with us, they asked us to operate with some degree of confidentiality. I would just say we know there is a significant exit fee that would be involved for us if we were to decide to leave."
Would the exit fee have been close to the $25 million SMU paid?
"I don't know that we even had any conversations with the commissioner of OK, if we decide to do this, it's going to be $25 million like SMU's, is it going to be less, is it going to be more. If I'm sitting in Tim Pernetti's shoes, I'm certainly thinking about what do I need to do to protect the conference, so the degree to which you would be looking at something significantly less than that is certainly questionable. As I said, we never got to a point where we were having those conversations with the AAC, but I did keep $25 million in mind as being the fee that the last institution paid, so if we were looking to make a departure, figuring that it was going to be in that approximate range."
Multiple message board peeps of mine (OK, I didn't actually word it that way) have said ESPN has a look-in to its media rights package with the AAC in 2026 and can adjust the amount it is paying the league. Is that accurate?
"Yes, my understanding and the commissioner was talking to us and he'd be the best person to give you the details, but I believe that's coming up in 2026 where there is an opportunity to make those adjustments."
How comfortable do you feel with where the AAC is?
"Very comfortable. At a time when I had a chance to meet and talk with the commissioner, which has been quite a bit over the past couple of weeks. We were talking on a fairly regular basis, but then it really got accelerated about two weeks ago, so it feels like we've had conversations every day, and so even before now I've really been comfortable with his vision for the conference, with how aggressive he wants to be to try to pursue opportunities for revenue enhancement for the league. He wants to look under every rock. He wants to explore every situation. He's been really good and open and he has shared information and he has communicated on a regular basis. Many times an organization is going to rise and fall on its leadership, and I think with him we have a strong leader in that position. I felt very strong about the AAC coming into this (AD) position. It's one of the reasons that I felt comfortable making the move. Mike Aresco was still in the position, but as the transition has happened and Tim has gotten into the chair, it's just really strengthened my feelings about what our future can possibly be."
How important was it that nobody left the league?
"That was something we talked about as athletic directors and the presidents had a chance in our conversation as we all had an opportunity to be able to weigh what was being put on the table. We felt that because none of us were seriously looking to accept and pursue what was being put in front of us, it presented an opportunity for us to put forward a show of unity and strength that you don't typically see in college athletics anymore. It feels like most of the time, most institutions when they're in these situations, it's kind of every school for itself. I was really impressed that almost from the very beginning, my phone began to ring with calls from the other ADs in the league to talk about the opportunity and to get our feelings and to try to see if we were on different pages or the same page, and I was really tremendously impressed with the way we were all able to come together and talk and really come to the same conclusion after looking at the information, even to the point that as things really came to a head this past Monday, I know that many of us were all together physically in Washington D.C. at the time at the LEAD1, now FBS athletic diector association meetings, so we were able to literally be in front of each other and have conversations and meet in person and just make sure that we were all on the same page. I think for all of us it became important that if we were looking at considering anything, that doing something that would possibly involve the other schools was an important consideration from the very beginning of our conversations."
