Which would you choose?

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I think most people's first choice would be for the ACC to add Notre Dame and a few more schools and continue business as usual. Assuming that isn't an option, would you rather see...

1) The BIG and SEC do their things and pick off more PAC schools and the ACC schools at the top of the hierarchy. Pitt is left to merge with the BIG 12, which also adds some PAC schools.

Conference looks something like: Pitt, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Cincy, Syracuse, Georgia Tech, Duke, Houston, UCF, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, BYU, Arizona, Arizona State, Boston College, Texas Tech, Utah, Cal, Stanford, Boise State.

2) Pitt somehow finds a place at the table with the new SEC.

3) Pitt somehow finds a place at the table with the new BIG.

Man, the money in #1 would be a fraction of what it would be in the other two options. So we know what the Pitt admin would prefer. But, especially in this NIL age, winning would not be easy in those latter two conferences. Whereas, in the first option, we would have about as good of a chance as anybody else (and a better chance than some) of winning that conference most years.

So which do you value more: Being competitive and playing in a solid conference or playing big-time football where being competitive might not be as easy?

When you really spell it out, I don't think the choice is a slam dunk.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Just to expound: We would never win the new BIG or SEC. Ever. We won a conference that included Clemson right before NIL blew up. Sorry, but we're not winning the SEC and I don't have to explain that one. And we're not winning a BIG with Ohio State, USC, probably Notre Dame, Michigan, and who knows who else in this age of NIL. I don't think the emphasis would be on conference championships as much as it would be qualifying for the playoff, but would not being at the top not wear on you as a fan? I think it would.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

Just to expound: We would never win the new BIG or SEC. Ever. We won a conference that included Clemson right before NIL blew up. Sorry, but we're not winning the SEC and I don't have to explain that one. And we're not winning a BIG with Ohio State, USC, probably Notre Dame, Michigan, and who knows who else in this age of NIL. I don't think the emphasis would be on conference championships as much as it would be qualifying for the playoff, but would not being at the top not wear on you as a fan? I think it would.

With the right leadership, an urban option in the SEC north is a niche that could allow Pitt to carve out some success.

and it’s early so I haven’t hit the crack pipe yet…as far as you know, Clark.

 

[WVUinColumbus]

I think most people's first choice would be for the ACC to add Notre Dame and a few more schools and continue business as usual. Assuming that isn't an option, would you rather see...

1) The BIG and SEC do their things and pick off more PAC schools and the ACC schools at the top of the hierarchy. Pitt is left to merge with the BIG 12, which also adds some PAC schools.

Conference looks something like: Pitt, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Cincy, Syracuse, Georgia Tech, Duke, Houston, UCF, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, BYU, Arizona, Arizona State, Boston College, Texas Tech, Utah, Cal, Stanford, Boise State.

2) Pitt somehow finds a place at the table with the new SEC.

3) Pitt somehow finds a place at the table with the new BIG.

Man, the money in #1 would be a fraction of what it would be in the other two options. So we know what the Pitt admin would prefer. But, especially in this NIL age, winning would not be easy in those latter two conferences. Whereas, in the first option, we would have about as good of a chance as anybody else (and a better chance than some) of winning that conference most years.

So which do you value more: Being competitive and playing in a solid conference or playing big-time football where being competitive might not be as easy?

When you really spell it out, I don't think the choice is a slam dunk.

Great question. From a WVU perspective, we would definitely choose SEC (and hopefully VT would join us). The chance of that happening is probably 0.000001 or maybe lower.

However, my gut is telling me that we would ultimately prefer to be in 1, with Pitt and Tech, and playing for very good tourneys with other like-talented schools, etc.

 

[RaleighPittFan]

#2 is the best long term option.

#1 is a redo of The Big East. I’ve seen that movie before.

There’s not a beeonegee team that I currently watch, or would want to watch with Pitt playing, so #3 is out.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Great question. From a WVU perspective, we would definitely choose SEC (and hopefully VT would join us). The chance of that happening is probably 0.000001 or maybe lower.

However, my gut is telling me that we would ultimately prefer to be in 1, with Pitt and Tech, and playing for very good tourneys with other like-talented schools, etc.

Wouldn't the SEC be cool for a few years and perhaps galvanize the fans and NIL collectives... and then eventually turn into mostly 6-wins seasons that drain the life out of the fan base? I mean, the built-in competitive disadvantages would almost be Pirates-esque.

 

[Las Panteras]

#2

being in the SEC means we don't win much.

But being in the SEC also gives a great chance at becoming a solid program. We would have a pretty good shot at recruiting northern / midwestern kids to play SEC football

and, we would get paid

 

[WVUinColumbus]

Wouldn't the SEC be cool for a few years and perhaps galvanize the fans and NIL collectives... and then eventually turn into mostly 6-wins seasons that drain the life out of the fan base? I mean, the built-in competitive disadvantages would almost be Pirates-esque.

That’s exactly my mindset too. The game day experience is awesome in the XII. It would be better in the SEC. I would love that!

It would get tiresome getting stomped week in and week out. Players eventually are going to get directly paid. That will increase the gap even more.

That’s why 1 would probably ultimately win out for me because it is crystal clear where this is all going.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

#2

being in the SEC means we don't win much.

But being in the SEC also gives a great chance at becoming a solid program. We would have a pretty good shot at recruiting northern / midwestern kids to play SEC football

and, we would get paid

But, as fans, why do you or I care about that money? So we can better support non-revenue teams I don't even follow? So we can have better facilities I'll never step foot inside? Wouldn't you rather watch a winning product on the field? Isn't that what this is all about? And we would likely recruit much better, but it's all relative to the competition.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

That’s exactly my mindset too. The game day experience is awesome in the XII. It would be better in the SEC. I would love that!

It would get tiresome getting stomped week in and week out. Players eventually are going to get directly paid. That will increase the gap even more.

That’s why 1 would probably ultimately win out for me because it is crystal clear where this is all going.

Game day experience is a big one. It's basically the difference between watching real, big-time college football in all its glory and watching something in the middle of that and high school football. But I don't care how good the experience is if my team is getting smacked around 52-17, ha. That's just not enjoyable.

 

[ratking17]

You take the money from either the SEC or big10 knowing it will splinter into something smaller and/or more regional probably 10-20 years in the future.

 

[LivinWell]

Wait a second, suddenly Pitt cant compete with Kentucky, Vandy, SC, Missu, Indiana, Rutgers, Maryland, Ill, Neb, etc. Heck we beat mid. SEC Tenn last year and should make it twice in a few months. It not like we are winning national championships now and maybe our recruiting would pick up

 

[9nationalchampionships]

dos

 

[HailToPitt725]

If Pitt somehow gets an invite into the SEC, that means they expanded past 20 schools and completely raided the ACC.

If they were to expand to 24 schools, I think there’d be at least five schools guaranteed: Clemson, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina, and Virginia Tech. That means including us, there’d be two spots remaining. Virginia or NC State perhaps? I’d like WVU but I don’t think they’d be invited. Either way, we’d likely be in some sort of pod or division with the schools listed above. I’d be fine with that.

I still think I’d like the Big Ten better. I know many on here would be against that on principle, but we’d likely be in a division with Maryland, Penn State, and Rutgers. It just seems like a better option both from a logistical and “fit” perspective.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Wait a second, suddenly Pitt cant compete with Kentucky, Vandy, SC, Missu, Indiana, Rutgers, Maryland, Ill, Neb, etc. Heck we beat mid. SEC Tenn last year and should make it twice in a few months. It not like we are winning national championships now and maybe our recruiting would pick up

Yes, we can compete with those teams. Did you forget about Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, Notre Dame, USC, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, etc.? Then there is Michigan State, Auburn, Michigan, Clemson, Miami, Florida State, Penn State, Ole Miss, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Iowa, Florida, etc. Oh, and Texas and Tennessee are throwing too much money around to be down forever. NIL is widening the gap, not shrinking it. We have a net negative inherent advantage over all of the above, plus more (Kentucky, Mississippi State, etc.).

 

[WVUinColumbus]

If Pitt somehow gets an invite into the SEC, that means they expanded past 20 schools and completely raided the ACC.

If they were to expand to 24 schools, I think there’d be at least five schools guaranteed: Clemson, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina, and Virginia Tech. That means including us, there’d be two spots remaining. Virginia or NC State perhaps? I’d like WVU but I don’t think they’d be invited. Either way, we’d likely be in some sort of pod or division with the schools listed above. I’d be fine with that.

I still think I’d like the Big Ten better. I know many on here would be against that on principle, but we’d likely be in a division with Maryland, Penn State, and Rutgers. It just seems like a better option both from a logistical and “fit” perspective.

WVU has next to no chance of getting invited to SEC.

Pitt has zero chance.

It’s fruitless to argue the fact (because neither are getting invited) but that’s the truth. We have played in numerous kickoff games, have a better brand, support our school greater, etc.

 

[9nationalchampionships]

WVU has next to no chance of getting invited to SEC.

Pitt has zero chance.

Beat it

 

[WVUinColumbus]

Beat it

Dude, I’m honestly not trying to be a d*** with that comment. It’s the truth.

Neither has a chance but there at least would be an outside sensible, rational reason with VT/WVU.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

If the Big 10 and SEC expand to 24, then we have a pretty good chance of getting into one of them. The SEC would help our recruiting, but the competition is a lot more difficult. The Big 10 would provide closer opponents and an easier path to winning 8 or more games.

 

[HailToPitt725]

If the Big 10 and SEC expand to 24, then we have a pretty good chance of getting into one of them. The SEC would help our recruiting, but the competition is a lot more difficult. The Big 10 would provide closer opponents and an easier path to winning 8 or more games.

Agreed. However, I think the biggest thing working against us is what incentive would either conference have at going past 20? I don’t think the added value would justify it from their perspective.

 

[RaleighPittFan]

Dude, I’m honestly not trying to be a d*** with that comment. It’s the truth.

Neither has a chance but there at least would be an outside sensible, rational reason with VT/WVU.

You’re living in a fantasy world where WVU has an equal shot with VPI.

It‘s also fantasy that WVU would get invited anywhere before Pitt. Hell, Pitt was the Big Xll’s choice before WVU.

It’s not bad enough that you are in a fantasy world, but you blabber that crap on Pitt’s message board 100 times a day.

You’re an uninvited court jester.

 

[Burgh15]

The first option is also the most realistic option. I'd really want to know more about how everything would look with each scenario. I'm not getting any of this money so it really isn't relevant to me. As we've seen, big budgets don't equate to successful programs either.

Are we talking an SEC or Big 10 with small divisions of 4-5 teams with the winners of each division making the playoffs like the NFL? If so, Pitt is going to be in a relatively weak geographic-based division and would have a terrific chance of making the playoffs that way. If it's the top two make a conference title game, forget about it.

 

[Ditka1960]

WVU is coming off a losing season, lost a quarter of its roster to the portal, has never even played in its conference championship, and you’re talking smack on the board of a present conference champion, that won 11 games last year, and owns your school 61-40-3. Hit the bricks.

 

[303vND]

Dude, I’m honestly not trying to be a d*** with that comment. It’s the truth.

Neither has a chance but there at least would be an outside sensible, rational reason with VT/WVU.

C'mon dawg...stop it!! There's little to no chance that WVU will be asked to join any of the Big 3 conferences. Yeah, Big3 because I don't think the ACC is going anywhere.

 

[The Ole Six-Fiver]

Pitt brass is likely pretty anxious right now about all this, but not for the same reasons as most on fan message boards.

Of the options presented, likely the Big Ten would be the best; there are many fans here who denounce the Big Ten because of lingering hatred (well deserved) of Penn State, but it’s the best fit for Pitt. There’s more history with the opponents (esp if ND lands there), there’s the AAU thing, and kinship with more northern, urbanite schools like Northwestern, Minnesota, and eventually USC and UCLA.

Pitt brass definitely wouldn’t be happy with the priorities and social culture of the SEC, the perceived racism, the bubba aspect, and the full emphasis on winning at any cost. We already hold our noses over the ACC for those things and the SEC is exponentially worse (or would be perceived as such by our brass anyway)

The Big 12 erector set plan is a nothing burger. But if it is the only choice, and MOST IMPORTANT, assures the continued funding of the non revenue mens and women’s sports, we’ll take it. Pitt is probably quaking in its boots about those sports, especially with noisy commitments made to the lacrosse program and building all those glossy new venues for those sports. So as bad as the B12 option would be for the football and hoops fans, it is the most likely of them.

 

[WVUinColumbus]

C'mon dawg...stop it!! There's little to no chance that WVU will be asked to join any of the Big 3 conferences. Yeah, Big3 because I don't think the ACC is going anywhere.

Agreed. I’ve said that all along.

My point is that Pitt and WVU aren’t being invited to SEC. I’ve repeated that. I responded to a poster who said “WVU wouldn’t be invited to SEC ahead of Pitt”.

And that’s silly. They aren’t adding a metro school north of the Mason-Dixon Line with poor overall viewership, limited history of winning in nearly a half century, poor brand appeal, etc over a team with quite a bit of success who has routinely played teams from the SEC (including 3-4 kickoff classics), has a natural partner in VT, culturally fits, etc.

The goals of the SEC and B1G are different besides the $$.

To repeat…neither is happening.

This isn’t an unreasonable take and I’m certain some on here agree.

SEC, Pitt :: B1G, WVU

 

[MJG-90]

Agreed. I’ve said that all along.

My point is that Pitt and WVU aren’t being invited to SEC. I’ve repeated that. I responded to a poster who said “WVU wouldn’t be invited to SEC ahead of Pitt”.

And that’s silly. They aren’t adding a metro school north of the Mason-Dixon Line with poor overall viewership, limited history of winning in nearly a half century, poor brand appeal, etc over a team with quite a bit of success who has routinely played teams from the SEC (including 3-4 kickoff classics), has a natural partner in VT, culturally fits, etc.

The goals of the SEC and B1G are different besides the $$.

To repeat…neither is happening.

This isn’t an unreasonable take and I’m certain some on here agree.

SEC, Pitt :: B1G, WVU

WVU to the B1G? If you had it reversed, I’d let it go. Pitt is a much better fit with the B1G than WVU. And WVU is a much better SEC fit than Pitt.

 

[WVUinColumbus]

WVU to the B1G? If you had it reversed, I’d let it go. Pitt is a much better fit with the B1G than WVU. And WVU is a much better SEC fit than Pitt.

It was an analogy implying poor association between those two sets.

(ie. You are correct. WVU and B1G “oil and water”)

 

[docden]

The best option would be in the Big10.
The second best would be the SEC.

Having the same payday and playing by the same rules with the same access to the playoff - that’s all any school can hope for. Otherwise we’ll be in what is essentially a G5 conference AT BEST. Cuz those 2 mega conferences might just say - we’re breaking away from the NCAA, you’re not invited at all. This is our league - see ya.

 

[Gunga_Galunga]

#1 is the MAC. Why would anyone voluntarily pick going to the MAC? That's where all the leftovers will end up anyway.

2 or 3, don't care which one.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

#1 is the MAC. Why would anyone voluntarily pick going to the MAC? That's where all the leftovers will end up anyway.

2 or 3, don't care which one.

I wouldn't say it'd be that bad. The size of the fan bases alone wouldn't allow for it.

I mean, recruiting would definitely take a hit for all these schools (e.g. no one like Elliot Donald would ever sign here when he would have an opportunity to bring in a respectable salary in one of the "big two" conferences). So yeah - the quality of play wouldn't be exactly what it is now for these schools, so referencing the fact that Pitt, Baylor, Utah, Oklahoma State, and Cincy all played in major bowls last year wouldn't exactly be relevant. Still, there are still only so many roster spots on these teams. The teams in this league would remain above the MAC schools in the hierarchy, just as they are now, and below the majority of the SEC and BIG schools, just as as they are now.

It'd basically be a slightly better, more expansive version of the old Big East. It may not have any big names that jump off the page, but I guarantee we'd have our hands full with trying to win this conference every year and we'd forget about being snoody real fast. That 2009 season was a heck of a ride, despite the fact that we saw 12-0 Cincinnati more or less get exposed against a good team from one of the better conferences. But that didn't stop 60,000+ from showing up in cold weather to watch us play them for a de facto big East title. Fans adjusted after Miami and Virginia Tech left, and they'd just have to do it again.

 

[LivinWell]

Yes, we can compete with those teams. Did you forget about Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, Notre Dame, USC, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, etc.? Then there is Michigan State, Auburn, Michigan, Clemson, Miami, Florida State, Penn State, Ole Miss, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Iowa, Florida, etc. Oh, and Texas and Tennessee are throwing too much money around to be down forever. NIL is widening the gap, not shrinking it. We have a net negative inherent advantage over all of the above, plus more (Kentucky, Mississippi State, etc.).

We would lose to the majority of those teams today.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

We would lose to the majority of those teams today.

I know. But we're not in a conference with the majority of them, so we can still win a title. If we're in a conference with all those teams, that will never happen again.

11-2 and an ACC Championship was a lot of fun. 6-6 and finishing in like 12th place of some 24-team super conference wouldn't be much fun at all.

 

[HailToPitt725]

We would lose to the majority of those teams today.

I know. But we're not in a conference with the majority of them, so we can still win a title. If we're in a conference with all those teams, that will never happen again.

It seems like we may now face the conundrum that schools such as Cincinnati and UCF had to deal with: would you rather lose on the biggest stage or win a lot of games but have no chance of attaining the ultimate prize?

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

It seems like we may now face the conundrum that schools such as Cincinnati and UCF had to deal with: would you rather lose on the biggest stage or win a lot of games but have no chance of attaining the ultimate prize?

Yeah, and I would argue that the divide between Alabama/LSU/Georgia/Oklahoma/Texas (if they figure their stuff out)/etc. and Pitt is wayyy larger than the divide between Cincinnati and UCF against the competition they're walking into. They probably won't go 12-0 again, but they can both win the Big 12 if the stars line up. There's no way in hell we could win these NFL-Lite booster-funded power conferences. At least I'm not seeing a path.

 

[RaleighPittFan]

I wouldn't say it'd be that bad. The size of the fan bases alone wouldn't allow for it.

I mean, recruiting would definitely take a hit for all these schools (e.g. no one like Elliot Donald would ever sign here when he would have an opportunity to bring in a respectable salary in one of the "big two" conferences). So yeah - the quality of play wouldn't be exactly what it is now for these schools, so referencing the fact that Pitt, Baylor, Utah, Oklahoma State, and Cincy all played in major bowls last year wouldn't exactly be relevant. Still, there are still only so many roster spots on these teams. The teams in this league would remain above the MAC schools in the hierarchy, just as they are now, and below the majority of the SEC and BIG schools, just as as they are now.

It'd basically be a slightly better, more expansive version of the old Big East. It may not have any big names that jump off the page, but I guarantee we'd have our hands full with trying to win this conference every year and we'd forget about being snoody real fast. That 2009 season was a heck of a ride, despite the fact that we saw 12-0 Cincinnati more or less get exposed against a good team from one of the better conferences. But that didn't stop 60,000+ from showing up in cold weather to watch us play them for a de facto big East title. Fans adjusted after Miami and Virginia Tech left, and they'd just have to do it again.

The option you are describing is worse than The Big East Pitt was in. That Big East still had a seat at the table at the end of the year for the best money bowls. The description you gave us as a conference wouldn’t be an auto qualifier for anything.

 

[The Ole Six-Fiver]

Pittsburgh, taken as a city and region, has a mighty chip on its shoulder, due to the still-predominant impression that it’s dirty, depressed, soot-covered crap hole. As such it gets far too much pride from being “major league” with its sports. History proves it. Any thing “minor league” has only the tiniest niche at best and not for very long.

It’s the primary reason that Pitt football will not survive very long as part of the also-ran of leftover schools being offered as an alternative to invites to the giant BIg Ten or SEC behemoths that are starting to form. If Pitt is left out of having even the theoretical chance to win a “national championship”, it will be fortuitous that we only rent our stadium, because there isn’t going to be much continued reason for Pitt to have it.

I hope Pitt leadership thoroughly understands what is at stake here. I know they really only care about the Woke stuff, but football in a P5 conference is what has made those woke sports possible.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

The option you are describing is worse than The Big East Pitt was in. That Big East still had a seat at the table at the end of the year for the best money bowls. The description you gave us as a conference wouldn’t be an auto qualifier for anything.

They might save us a few spots in their 16-team playoff if we agree to provide a tuneup game the first week of the season and then shine their shoes afterwards.

I mean, we already know the monetary disparity will be off the charts. We'll probably get about $8.8M/year, and the haves will get $88M/year. It just is what it is. Even with the $66M our conference received for the Peach Bowl last year... Divide that by 24 teams and it's still loose change to the haves.

 

[Las Panteras]

Pitt brass is likely pretty anxious right now about all this, but not for the same reasons as most on fan message boards.

Of the options presented, likely the Big Ten would be the best; there are many fans here who denounce the Big Ten because of lingering hatred (well deserved) of Penn State, but it’s the best fit for Pitt. There’s more history with the opponents (esp if ND lands there), there’s the AAU thing, and kinship with more northern, urbanite schools like Northwestern, Minnesota, and eventually USC and UCLA.

Pitt brass definitely wouldn’t be happy with the priorities and social culture of the SEC, the perceived racism, the bubba aspect, and the full emphasis on winning at any cost. We already hold our noses over the ACC for those things and the SEC is exponentially worse (or would be perceived as such by our brass anyway)

The Big 12 erector set plan is a nothing burger. But if it is the only choice, and MOST IMPORTANT, assures the continued funding of the non revenue mens and women’s sports, we’ll take it. Pitt is probably quaking in its boots about those sports, especially with noisy commitments made to the lacrosse program and building all those glossy new venues for those sports. So as bad as the B12 option would be for the football and hoops fans, it is the most likely of them.

This is a terrific post. I completely forgot the stalled fundraising for the new facilities.

And yes....it is highly likely we are headed towards some type of alliance with big 12 schools

The SEC wouldnt waste 5 minutes considering us. The big ten may set aside a half an hour before they say no.

So we are stuck in a a second rate league, looking up at the big boys.

 

[revampedpanthers]

I think most people's first choice would be for the ACC to add Notre Dame and a few more schools and continue business as usual. Assuming that isn't an option, would you rather see...

1) The BIG and SEC do their things and pick off more PAC schools and the ACC schools at the top of the hierarchy. Pitt is left to merge with the BIG 12, which also adds some PAC schools.

Conference looks something like: Pitt, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Cincy, Syracuse, Georgia Tech, Duke, Houston, UCF, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, BYU, Arizona, Arizona State, Boston College, Texas Tech, Utah, Cal, Stanford, Boise State.

2) Pitt somehow finds a place at the table with the new SEC.

3) Pitt somehow finds a place at the table with the new BIG.

Man, the money in #1 would be a fraction of what it would be in the other two options. So we know what the Pitt admin would prefer. But, especially in this NIL age, winning would not be easy in those latter two conferences. Whereas, in the first option, we would have about as good of a chance as anybody else (and a better chance than some) of winning that conference most years.

So which do you value more: Being competitive and playing in a solid conference or playing big-time football where being competitive might not be as easy?

When you really spell it out, I don't think the choice is a slam dunk.

3 big ten isnt as good as the sec and we have closer games. Pitt wouldnt win the big 10 but they would be competitive likely right away. The sec would be tough until/if the recruiting moved up enough to be competitive and we will never be competitive with the top half of that conference because of nil. Outside of maybe 6 teams I think we could compete in the big 10 even with the weaker nil money.