PAC12 will ride again...
Maybe change the name to the "X State Conference"?
71 Replies
1y
Who will be the next two?
Utah? Nevada? Montana should make the jump up.
** Edited by Victor Tango at 9/12/2024, 9:31:09 AM
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
H
HOO86
1y
That's why I keep hoping that the ACC gets another Men's Lacrosse team so we can get to 6 for an auto-bid. Most of the ACC gets at large bids anyway, but as the sport grows it will get harder.
Now 6 won't get much of a media contract, but the conference can be with 6 to start.
(In response to this post by Victor Tango)
1y
needs 8 full members.
(In response to this post by HOO86)
H
HOO86
1y
Probably need that for playoffs too.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
T
Truthahn
1y
I assume they are working on TV deals hoping to get one good enough to include a few AAC schools into the mix. They are probably trying for UTSA, Memphis, Tulane and USF.
Failing that, I assume they would then add a few more MWC teams or Texas State, and hope for close to AAC level money. UNLV is probably top of that list, IMO.
Montana and Montana State are probably good backfills for the MWC. I could see the MWC also go after NM State and UTEP.
(In response to this post by Victor Tango)
1y
(In response to this post by Victor Tango)
S
Stech
1y
Maybe they are on the table for the PAC and we don’t know it. 🤷♂️
(In response to this post by Victor Tango)
H
HOO86
1y
They want to be in either the B1G or ACC. And they have achieved the ACC over the objection of Clemson & FSU. We'll have to see what they think after being here for a while.
(In response to this post by Stech)
H
HOO86
1y
It doesn't look like they are ready to leave.
Link:
link
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
1y
but, unfortunately, I don't think that's in the cards. The ACC is stuck with that anchor, probably permanently. Practically speaking, neither is taking a pay cut to move down the ladder, and, even if the money weren't an issue, neither Cal nor Stanford would "stoop" to playing in a conference with Boise State.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
1y
So probably not explicitly a pay cut...until you GOR/exit fee issues
(In response to this post by Baltimore_Hokie)
1y
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
1y
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
1y
(In response to this post by Windows NT)
The ACC Grant of Rights may have something to say about that
(In response to this post by VT Pez4Life)
Actually they're absolutely terrible fits in every way except geography.
(In response to this post by VT Pez4Life)
S
Stech
1y
but who knows. I do know that there is a lot of dissatisfaction over the Olympic Sports travel from Coast to Coast. Yes some people still care about Academics and the travel in the Olympic Sports. Football especially, is no big deal with 1 or 2 games a year and chartered jets.
(In response to this post by VT Pez4Life)
1y
They would be joining one of the lower level conferences, money won't be there, I just can't envision that happening.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
(In response to this post by hokietony)
S
Stech
1y
(In response to this post by tcc_dc)
E
EDGEMAN
1y
USF - study for possible future membership...lol
(In response to this post by Stech)
USF is an AAU member and that fact gets a lot of run in the Tampa Bay area
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
S
Stech
1y
They are Academic people first and sports fans second.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
1y
for academics beyond some nice press conference window dressing.
But you knew I'd say that. 😉
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
and the school too. The B1G for instance is more into it, some in the ACC too. IMHO Louisville never gets in except for FSU & Clemson threatening to leave for the B12.
As you have pointed out it’s probably a big mistake, but some of the more elite academic schools don’t feel that way at the top IMHO.
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
because they can. It sounds good, but it's still meaningless when the rubber hits the road. We have no greater chance of doing anything academic with Cal and Stanford than we did before the joined the ACC. That's just not the way academic work happens. Why would it? And our academic reputation is not enhanced because we now play sportsball with them. Nobody will watch VT @ Stanford football and say "oh, I didn't know VT was such a good school!"
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
a Land Grant as you know, the mission is different than Stanford’s, again as you well know, that creates different attitudes towards some things.
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
It's SPORTS. Of course VT is a different academic institution from Stanford because it's a public land grant, but that has nothing to do with conference affiliation. Talk about apples and orangutans.
Or maybe you can connect those dots for me?
But you go on believing that Sands and the Stanford and Cal presidents will now hang out in their smoking jackets sipping branding in the ACC executive library discussing new joint research centers because they now play football semi-regularly.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
approach who they associate with differently. No I don’t think Sands is now going to get closer to Stanford and Cal because they are in the ACC. However, I believe that some schools aren’t candidates for the B1G or ACC because of an Academic Elitist attitude from certain University Presidents. Are you trying to say that doesn’t exist? That neither the B1G or ACC has University Presidents that won’t vote for a school because their Academic Profile isn’t good enough for them? How many schools has the B1G admitted that didn’t have AAU status? Nebraska had it when they were admitted, as I am sure you know.
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
the Big Ten didn't vote to add Cal and Stanford even though they are currently AAU members. Likewise, the Big Ten probably wouldn't add Kansas and Pitt even though they are currently AAU members. Heck the long running joke was that the Big Ten would gladly make an exception for Notre Dame even though they were not AAU members. It may even explain the decision to give Notre Dame AAU membership in 2023.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
ends, so who knows what the future will bring. Oregon and Washington were left out of the B1G until they were not.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
1y
made cents (and sense) for the Big Ten to tap into both markets. Plus, it would have allowed the Big Ten to create a "division" of 6 which may make things easier in terms of scheduling for all sports.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
didn’t want to leave each other. Because you are right NoCal is a huge market even though it’s an NFL market, that fits the recent profile for the B1G/Fox. Fox’s bread and butter is the NFL, and they want schools like Rutgers and Maryland to promote it on Saturday IMHO. Neither of which have an era of great football success, but that’s not their priority. Promoting the NFL appears to be priority 1 for Fox.
** Edited by Stech at 9/13/2024, 9:55:50 AM
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
1y
again, obviously there are differences...that's certainly not up for debate.
Are there presidents who are elitist and would use academics as some sort of tie-breaker? Sure. Has it happened? Not sure it has. Like FSU and Louisville to the ACC, if it makes good football/sports sense, it will happen, academics be damned. Because common sense.
No, the B1G has not admitted anyone that's not AAU. I also believe they couldn't give 2 💩's that Nebraska now isn't AAU. They happen to be a conference that was already full of AAU members when sports became big and realignment became a thing and they were fortunate that logical candidates had the status. And I think it actually started as at least somewhat of an academic organization (Intercollegiate Conference of Faculty Representatives), so that makes a difference, sorta like the Ivy League didn't start as an athletics conference. Honestly, at this point I feel like the B1G has painted themselves in a corner with the academic argument. They went on for years about the majesty of the CIC, now the B1G Academic Alliance or whatever...which really is a nothingburger if you actually look at what it does (or more importantly doesn't do)...so now they'll feel/look hypocritical if they don't hold to the AAU standard.
And my point really is that it's merely lip service. Even the snootiest president understands that conference membership isn't going to impact academics in any material way.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
I agree with all of that. 🤣 Seriously, I do.
(In response to this post by Pylons)
1y
Either they raid the Mountain West further and take most of the schools, or they have to get creative. I don't think they can pull back the four corner schools (at least not within the next two years, which is their deadline from NCAA). And I don't think they will want to go too far, so east coast teams are out and south is out.
My guess is we might see a promotion to FBS for South Dakota, North Dakota, and Montana from FCS (if they were interested).
The most likely poaching would be geographically from Nevada, New Mexico, UTEP, New Mexico State, Utah State, UNLV, Wyoming, San Jose State.
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
1y
pulling back the 4 corners, as they have poaching the ACC.
If you look at their attendance figures, those 6 draw about the same as the top 4 AAC schools, and the top 2 of the Sun belt. I think they will go for all the schools that have been mentioned as backfills for the B12 and the ACC.
It's going to be the Back Fill Conference. BTW, East Carolina and App. State fit the attendance profile. There isn't one single G5 conference that will not expand from their "regional" footprint. Only the SEC and ACC talk of regionality anymore, and the ACC broke from that with CalFord and SMU.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
1y
There is no need for the PAC to go east of the Mississippi river. If they do go east, they would need to grab a bunch of teams to make it worthwhile. They are not getting ACC or B12 money. It doesn't make any sense for them to spread out too much for maybe $20m a year if they are lucky.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
1y
well.
If there is a media deal worth close to $15M a year, there isn't a G5 "taken" school that would not want to be included in the PAC. Not a single one.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
1y
The best G5 schools were already taken by the B12. The PAC won't get close to the B12 money so those schools are not going to jump.
The next best group of G5 schools were just claimed by the PAC (Boise St, San Diego St). After that, the remaining G5 schools are all meh. Sure any one of the remaining G5 schools would jump up to the PAC if offered. But the PAC doesn't have good choices. None of the remaining G5 schools move the needle for prestige or interest or quality football. All they get is markets.
And if a team in the AAC gets the same money (hypothetically) as the PAC, then they could choose to stay and have less travel. But this is all speculation. Will be interesting to see what/who comes next.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
1y
like everything in this realignment mess, it comes down to the money. The proposed 6 in the PAC is a sound base, but can they attract enough market share to secure a $15M media package? That will be my first question moving forward, and will be key to determining who, if any school from the AAC would consider the conference.
A West coast Centric conference will never get that kind of money by themselves without the former PAC members - so, where do they find that kind of value? It has to be from the AAC currently.
Without going into what would happen if the ACC doesn't get their contract, who would attract the media dollars?
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
1y
themselves for a playoff spot. Any school in the G5 today would jump at a $15M media deal if there is one.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
1y
follow them. Maybe those 4 are the only ones they were willing to pay the exit fees for.
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
1y
up for possible future inclusion in a "power" conference. Look at markets, attendance, and future brands.
(In response to this post by mancunian)
1y
Tulane and Memphis would work, although I'd like to see a new PAC12 be geographically coherent. Of course, geography is out the window in this whole mishegoss.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
O
obguthr
1y
to hopefully entice soneone from the AAC to defect. It won't work, but it's worth the attempt. They always have UNLV, Air Force and others to fall back on. I also think they don't go too big. Should the ACC collapse, they could snag a BC or even Syracuse.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
1y
and the top 4 Mountain west schools. It appears they are trying to form a clear top G5 conference. Depending on how things play out, there are currently 5 auto's in the playoffs. Could they be in discussion with the top remaining AAC schools? Given the recent moves, I would not at all assume they will remain a western "regional" conference.
There is also the instability of the ACC. We do not know how this plays out, so a few schools in the ACC may be looking for a landing spot in the future.
The AAC has had Wichita State as a basketball member for years. Could the new PAC add Gonzaga as a basketball only member? Then, they would only need one to form a conference, and wait, like everyone else, and see what happens with the ACC.
They would also have to have media interest, and it doesn't have to be ESPN or FOX. CBS, Amazon, along with a couple of linier channels that have been struggling might be looking for content that isn't already booked.
** Edited by Big12 guy at 9/12/2024, 7:38:29 AM
(In response to this post by obguthr)
O
obguthr
1y
Currently, the AAC media deal is higher than MWC. The new Pac should be worth more, but it may not be enough to justify the move. I'm just not sure anyone like Memphis or Tulane would jump. If the Pac still had power status, this would be an entirely different conversation.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
1y
He said that The PAC hopes to poach two Texas schools with UTSA as a priority. They may also approach Tulane, Memphis, and long-shot Navy.
I think Air Force will take this opportunity to join Army and Navy in The American.
If The PAC succeeds in Texas, this will be the best-looking of the G5's. But it's still a G5. Fox and CW share the PAC contract. Will both stay involved? How will Fox handle the diminished MWC? (Expires after 2025-26 season) There will be eight teams left. (Seven if AF leaves) Will UNLV attract offers? San Jose? CBS is still the primary media partner. Will they stay in the mix?
The unfortunate timing of this announcement is no accident. They are trying to embarrass me for predicting, just days ago, that OSU/WSU would be forced to join The MWC. I'll bear the slight. Just glad to see realignment in motion again.
(In response to this post by obguthr)
1y
schools, but the 4 that have been invited have all received press and interest from the B12, or at least talk of moving up to a power conference. All 6 of these schools have been discussed as backfill if the need were to arise. Memphis, Tulane, and USF have also been discussed as backfill.
The AAC and the Mountain West media contracts would be set aside, as a conference of the most valuable schools in those conferences forming a new conference, would set them up as a clear value added content provider, and would command a media deal that would clearly put them in that grey area between the power conferences, and the G5.
(In response to this post by obguthr)
S
Stech
1y
they grabbed G5 schools and many think survived and eventually grew because of it.
Why can’t the PAC do the same?
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
1y
for the PAC if this is officially announced.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
R
RJHokie
1y
(In response to this post by Stech)
1y
I wouldn’t be surprised if they go after one or more Texas schools as well. UTSA?
(In response to this post by LonghornHokie)
1y
** Edited by HokieAl at 9/12/2024, 9:22:30 AM
(In response to this post by obguthr)
