PAC 12 to add 4?
- Thread starter Dan1911
- Start date
If I am an Oregon State/Washington State fan, I'd rather go independent and then hope for a landscape change where the ACC falls apart and they can get Cal & SMU back or even Utah and the Arizonas. Those schools are never going back to a league which include the JUCOs they just added.
I think what may end up happening though once FSU, Clem, UNC, and others leave the ACC is there will be some type of merger that creates 1 30ish team super-conference which would be #3 behind the P2. Call it the Allstate League or some corporate name.
Allstate League East
Pitt
WVU
Syr
BC
UConn
VT
NC St
GT
USF
UCF
Allstate League Midwest
SMU
TCU
Baylor
TT
OK St
Kansas
Kansas St
Iowa St
Lou
Cin
Allstate League West
Utah
BYU
Az
ASU
Cal
Stan
SDSU
Oregon St
Colorado
Washington St
I think what may end up happening though once FSU, Clem, UNC, and others leave the ACC is there will be some type of merger that creates 1 30ish team super-conference which would be #3 behind the P2. Call it the Allstate League or some corporate name.
Allstate League East
Pitt
WVU
Syr
BC
UConn
VT
NC St
GT
USF
UCF
Allstate League Midwest
SMU
TCU
Baylor
TT
OK St
Kansas
Kansas St
Iowa St
Lou
Cin
Allstate League West
Utah
BYU
Az
ASU
Cal
Stan
SDSU
Oregon St
Colorado
Washington St
I don’t think they’d be doing this now if they believed that a Big 12 or ACC invite was likely to happen in the foreseeable future.
why dont we just go to two huge conferences with regional divisions that would realign with the conferences we all grew up and watched. This way, it would basically be like it was in the 80s and 90s but the revenue would be equally distributed?
it would literally be the college football world coming full circle.
it would literally be the college football world coming full circle.
Cal and Stanford having regrets? I know the ACC is significantly better as is, but they didn't exactly get a sweetheart deal (more like the redheaded stepchild of Doyle from Sling Blade deal) to join it... in addition to the collapse being all but imminent.
I'm not sure the biggest schools want the revenue to be evenly distributed. Nor do I think the antitrust laws allow it given that the Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA is not entitled to an antitrust exemption.
What you're seeing is a separation developing where the Big 10 and SEC get all the powerhouse schools. Just below that is FBS and below that is FCS. You're seeing the best FCS schools move up to FBS, too, which is really how it should be.
If you're Boise State, would you rather play the best Mountain West schools, Oregon State, and Washington State annually, or play jobbers like Nevada and New Mexico every year? I think that's a pretty obvious answer. The Mountain West killed off the WAC but in doing so had to take on some schools that just aren't that exciting when the league's low tier was already pretty low.
Expecting them to add two more schools, maybe even from the American, and then get some kind of scheduling alliance together with the Big West for basketball unless the WCC is open to that same deal. Because with the American, they're facing the same problem. Sure they blocked the Mountain West from expanding, but in doing so they had to add Rice and North Texas. Did that really improve the conference?
Mountain West should try to poach the Unholy Four of Montana, Montana State, NDSU, and SDSU and restore parity to FCS.
If you're Boise State, would you rather play the best Mountain West schools, Oregon State, and Washington State annually, or play jobbers like Nevada and New Mexico every year? I think that's a pretty obvious answer. The Mountain West killed off the WAC but in doing so had to take on some schools that just aren't that exciting when the league's low tier was already pretty low.
Expecting them to add two more schools, maybe even from the American, and then get some kind of scheduling alliance together with the Big West for basketball unless the WCC is open to that same deal. Because with the American, they're facing the same problem. Sure they blocked the Mountain West from expanding, but in doing so they had to add Rice and North Texas. Did that really improve the conference?
Mountain West should try to poach the Unholy Four of Montana, Montana State, NDSU, and SDSU and restore parity to FCS.
yes, that comment by me was tongue in cheek. the bigger schools wanting the bigger piece of the pie is what started this mess.
And people, both fans and in college football, seem to be slowly inching back to mega conferences with sub divisions or pods.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
I don't really know what this does for them other than create some scheduling certainty. Does nothing for revenue.
scheduling certainty in this day and age is a huge concern. you see it particularly in mid-major basketball but it's a problem everywhere.
Regrets that they won't be a a league with Oregon State, Washington State, San Diego State, Boise, Colorado State and Fresno?
Good god, no.
The more I think about this, the more I think there's not that many paths that make sense.
1. 8+2: Add UTSA, Tulane, Gonzaga, and St. Mary's. This gives you the best possible basketball with an attempt to make football make sense a little. The biggest downside here is that you're only getting 7 conference games in football, but you do get 18 in basketball, which is absolutely necessary.
2. 10+2: Add UTSA, Tulane, Memphis, UNLV, Gonzaga, and St. Mary's. You now get your 8 or 9 game conference schedule depending on whatever you prefer in football as well as being able to get 18+ conference games in basketball.
3. 12: Add UTSA, Tulane, Memphis, UNLV... and then it honestly gets a little fuzzy. The American doesn't have many more good brands... they've got USF, so you could, I guess, but I can't see wanting USF over Gonzaga and St. Mary's. Just doesn't bring enough to the table. Rice? Or do you go to New Mexico or Utah State from the MWC, or UTEP from CUSA? That's really where you get to!
I think option 2 makes the most sense.
1. 8+2: Add UTSA, Tulane, Gonzaga, and St. Mary's. This gives you the best possible basketball with an attempt to make football make sense a little. The biggest downside here is that you're only getting 7 conference games in football, but you do get 18 in basketball, which is absolutely necessary.
2. 10+2: Add UTSA, Tulane, Memphis, UNLV, Gonzaga, and St. Mary's. You now get your 8 or 9 game conference schedule depending on whatever you prefer in football as well as being able to get 18+ conference games in basketball.
3. 12: Add UTSA, Tulane, Memphis, UNLV... and then it honestly gets a little fuzzy. The American doesn't have many more good brands... they've got USF, so you could, I guess, but I can't see wanting USF over Gonzaga and St. Mary's. Just doesn't bring enough to the table. Rice? Or do you go to New Mexico or Utah State from the MWC, or UTEP from CUSA? That's really where you get to!
I think option 2 makes the most sense.
Was there a penalty for the schools that left the Pac 12? And if so, does it all go to Wash St and Oregon St?
yes and yes, but it was used to help buy out these schools
They are creating the easiest path to the playoffs. They will essentially be the B1GWest without needing to play tO$U in the B1G Championship. That's not happening as independents.
FTR, they are probably very happy that you are not an Oregon State/ Washington State fan.
Last edited:
Yes. I believe Wash St and Oregon State got around $200 million each from the P12 schools who left. They will owe $20 million each to the MWC for poaching when they had a scheduling agreement.
It’s San Diego state, Boise state, Colorado state and Fresno state.
Just realized there seems to be a theme there!
I like the Gonzaga idea but not sure Gonzaga would agree to it.
If I was the Pac 12, I'd only go to 8 teams. Play 5 OOC's where I'd try to schedule home and homes with Ore, Wash, Cal, Stan, USC, and UCLA. Those teams may want quality West Coast home and homes due to the amount of conference travel they have.
As for the last 2 to add:
1. UNLV - has to be. Great market. Football is improving. Great road trip for fans.
2. Memphis - doubt they'd leave the AAC for this league though
So probably New Mexico, Utah State, or maybe UTSA or Tulane (who may not want to leave the AAC).
Isn't UNLV's athletic department a total mess, I kind of remember reading that was the biggest reason they've been way down on the list when it comes to expansion. Also, I think the Pac 2 has grabbed who they wanted from the Mtn. West and will pick off two of the AAC teams west of or on the Mississippi River.
There was just an article earlier this week where it stated the acc reached out to them, but with little revenue and more travel both school didn’t want to do it although cal and Stanford did.
At the end of the day there will probably be some merger or agreement between the new pac and the remaining acc once the acc has defects.
No
Stanford and Cal want to be associated with Top Academic Universities including 10 AAU Research Universities.
Neither Florida State or Clemson are AAU research universities.
Standford has a $36 Billion Endowment and they are more interested in preserving their academic and research reputation.
LOL!!!! The ACC is not going to collapse.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Last edited:
because "we" do not wield the power, "they" (Big and SEC) do...Only god (aka TV) can change things...
You can make a case for Oregon State because its not that far from Portland but Washington State, no way no how. Nobody lives in Western Washington/Eastern Idaho. They are WAY down the list behind many many schools like San Diego State, Colorado State, Memphis, Tulane, etc. Washington State is basically like Wake Forest. They are a mid-major who just happened to be in the Pac 12.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
Meh, I wouldn't count on the auto bids remaining a thing.
And i irrationally love them nonetheless. Probably because of Mike Leach when he was there.
A lot of people on other boards are thinking that Cal and Stanford will have a very difficult time with the travel in the ACC and have a good chance of going back to the PAC6 to get it up to 8 teams, which I guess is a magic number for FBS football conferences.
There is a 0% Stanford is ever going back to that version of the Pac 12. They aren't going to be in a league with 2 Cal State schools and Boise State, which was a junior college 50 years ago. They would go independent and park their Olympic Sports in the WCC if need be.
As for Cal, there is no chance they'd leave the current version of the ACC. Now, if the ACC has a big exodus, maybe they go to the Big 12. They are a big enough brand and market to join the B12 at any time. I cant see them joining a glorified Mountain West over the Big 12.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
Just curious, why is there concern that Cal and Stanford will have a difficult time with travel but the western schools in other conferences won't? That question isn't for you. It just seems as if the ACC is the only conference where it's perceived as an issue.
And there are even fewer of them who live in Eastern Washington/Western Idaho!
Well what I hear is that it all comes down to finances. Oregon and Washington are getting paid sufficient to make it worthwhile to send their student athletes all across the country. Stanford and Cal are (allegedly) not getting paid enough from the ACC deal.
Stanford and Cal will make more in the years they are getting a third share of ACC money than they would getting 100% of whatever the new PAC6 is going to get.
And then the day will come when they get a full ACC share, and that's going to be so much more than the PAC6 could ever hope to get.
The PAC6 is going to be looking at getting a little more than the $3.5 million per school that the MWC is currently getting. Heck, they could triple that and still not come close to what Stanford and Cal will be getting from the ACC. And what are the chances that they actually get anywhere close to that much?
It cant possibly come down to finances as Cal & Stanford will make considerably more in the ACC even after the travel expenses. Now, if there are qualify of like concerns for the student-athletes with all that travel, that would be the only reason to move back.
Your reading all that big 12 garbage. THE PAC 12 DOESN'T EVEN HAVE EIGHT TEAMS.. The teams they got are the leftovers. Otherwise .....
Look at how often posters on this site bring travel up when belittling the hoopies. It’s only a problem if it’s happening to the other team,
pittdan77
Athletic Director
It's a problem regardless of who it happens to. Yeah, we realize that WVU has been running around the like crazy for years but suddenly it's a huge problem for ACC schools. Just seems like everyone is ignoring what's going on everywhere else and that it's really a problem for everyone now.
Similar threads
