The Hotline mailbag is published every Friday. Send questions to pac12hotline@bayareanewsgroup.com and include ‘mailbag’ in the subject line — or hit me on Twitter: @WilnerHotline.

(Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.)

Why is the Pac-12 being so tight lipped about everything and allowing the Big 12 to control the media narrative? — @Brandt_Anderson

This is a fascinating subplot to the saga.

Presumably at commissioner George Kliavkoff’s direction, the Pac-12 has kept the details of its negotiations quiet and refused to respond to media reports suggesting the conference is on the brink of collapse.

The avoidance of leaks has been impressive, especially given the duration of the process. And at this point, the discussions are entirely at the presidential level — the athletic directors are not involved.

Kliavkoff’s approach serves his bosses (the presidents) and his negotiating partners at ESPN, Amazon, Apple, etc.

However, the void has been filled with rumor and speculation, much of it coming from the Big 12 footprint and all of it designed to 1) undermine Pac-12 stability, and 2) devalue Pac-12 media rights.

Even Big 12 coaches and athletic directors are speaking publicly about poaching the conference — an astounding turn of events compared to the manner in which college sports has operated in the past.

(It’s not a good look for the industry, not a good look at all.)

All the noise from the Big 12 creates palpable tension within the Pac-12, at least on the front lines. I’m not sure whether the impact is nearly as great at the board level.

But remember, too, that the Pac-12 created the window for a negative narrative to emerge by taking this process across two calendar years.

Clearly, the TV deals on the table stink since nothing has been signed yet. Do the Four Corners schools keep waiting around for an 11th-hour miracle and not leave until the deal is finalized? — @REcclesness

I cannot imagine any president would agree to join the Big 12 without knowing the final proposal from Pac-12 media partners; it would be fiscally irresponsible of them.

Even if they wanted to bolt early — and I have no reason to believe that’s true — their governing boards (regents and trustees) would insist on knowing the options.

There is plenty of noise in the media ecosystem, but our view has not changed: We believe all 10 presidents would prefer to remain in the Pac-12.

Also, we should note the important distinction between a disappointing contract and a deal so unacceptable that it forces schools to leave.

That said: Approval of a media contract requires only eight of the 10 votes.

Will we have news on the media deal/expansion before the presidents meet in two weeks? — @lilcmac5

It’s entirely possible.

The board of directors met Tuesday and is scheduled to convene (remotely) again the week after next. However, the process is unfolding daily on a less formal basis, with commissioner Kliavkoff discussing options with the executive committee and individual presidents. (And the presidents are talking with each other.)

We are all but certain that every president will know the specifics of the media deal and the expansion options before the next board meeting. There will be no surprises. If everyone is ready to move forward, they assuredly would vote before the next meeting. Kliavkoff has zero reason to wait.

Also, expect any approvals to be unanimous or portrayed as unanimous. The conference won’t want any hint of discontent.

As a source once told the Hotline: “In higher education, a 9-to-1 vote is a tie.”

Do you see the potential for Friday Night games on Amazon to hurt recruiting, especially when trying to recruit nationally? — @TheSaferMan

We believe there is only one requirement for the Pac-12 media deal: The conference must have its best football games on ESPN (or ABC) — partly to provide exposure for the games themselves, partly because a contractual agreement with ESPN would result in the studio shows discussing the conference.

Otherwise, I do not believe any single aspect of the visibility component is make-or-break, whether it’s the number of games on streaming services or the days of competition.

Even a weekly Friday game on Amazon would carry little recruiting damage. Prime Video is available anywhere, just like ESPN+ (both require a monthly fee).

Bottom line: Recruits will care, first and foremost, about NIL money.

If the teams in the Pac-12 have their name, image and likeness games in place, and a presence on ESPN, recruiting will be fine.