Realignment talk not going away

[USC Traveler 488]

2 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

Pac doesn't want to add more MWC schools right now because it would drop MWC below 8 schools and lead to legal issues. Otherwise, UNLV and Airforce would be added right now.

Yeah- UNLV and AFA definitely seem like the logical programs to add that are still in the MW.

But what legal issues are they worried about ?  The PAC went from 10 schools to 4 schools in one day and that didn't create any legal problems for the exiting schools.

[billfromlaketravis 11485]

Just now, Jabberwocky said:

Pac doesn't want to add more MWC schools right now because it would drop MWC below 8 schools and lead to legal issues. Otherwise, UNLV and Airforce would be added right now.

Next for the Pac will probably be UTSA first and foremost. Memphis and Tulane are not keen on the idea of traveling west for all of their games. That leaves a basket of UNT, Rice, or Tulsa as a probable addition with UTSA.

Source? 
 

I know we all love UTSA and Texas State in this thread, but let’s tap the brakes on putting them in the PAC. 

[pops 6985]

6 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

I am wondering if this is one of those political games tied to politics in the state of Nevada again. The Pac would probably only want one of the two and the BOR/State is posturing that isnt going to happen.

Maybe... But Vegas and Reno weren't in the same conference for most of their respective histories. 

['stache 21816]

27 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

There it is.  Good call TK.

I agree that's where this is heading.  They'd be smart to add AFA to set the stage for a an eventual merger with the ACC leftovers.

I could see the ACC leftovers (Wake, Cuse, BC,Stanford, Cal, etc) bringing in the service academies, adding the top Sunbelt schools and merging with the “new PAC” to become the far and away dominant G6 conference. The champ of that conference would almost certainly get an autobid for as long as that structure exists.

They would get the best G6 tv deal, and having east and west divisions would allow them to play a mostly regional schedule to reduce travel costs.

Stanford and Cal might have to just swallow their pride and join the Big XII if the ACC academic types leave them behind. I think the offer would be there, they’re at least as valuable as Houston or Cincinnati I would think.

Edited September 12 by 'stache

[Lonestar88 4664]

18 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

Pac doesn't want to add more MWC schools right now because it would drop MWC below 8 schools and lead to legal issues. Otherwise, UNLV and Airforce would be added right now.

Next for the Pac will probably be UTSA first and foremost. Memphis and Tulane are not keen on the idea of traveling west for all of their games. That leaves a basket of UNT, Rice, or Tulsa as a probable addition with UTSA.

If I’m an AAC team, I’m not leaving for the PAC until I’m sure of what the TV deal would look like. The AAC TV deal currently has higher payouts than the Mountain West, and this new PAC is basically just Mountain West #2 right now.

[USC Traveler 488]

West division

Wazzu, Beavs, Boise, SDSU, Fresno, UNLV

 

East Division

CSU, AFA, UTSA, Rice, Tulane, Memphis

 

That's probably the best scenario for the "newPAC" until the ACC implodes, as the winner would get the G6 autobid in most years.

Memphis would have a game in CO and two games out West every year.  Would that be worth it to be in the best G6 league ?  (That league should make more tv money than any other G6.)

 

[Laxtonto 12080]

What makes this weird is the thing the new PacX has to offer is PAc after dark. So I am guessing that the late windows on Thurs, Fri, & Sat are much better when there is atleast one "brand" involved. If the new Pac can roll up one or two additional brands, then their TV deal will probably be OK. It might be a situation that it is less about market footprint and more about knowing this is going to be about being the main late night ESPN anchor that will be going against USC/UCLA and the ACC twins.

[USC Traveler 488]

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Stanford and Cal might have to just swallow their pride and join the Big XII if the ACC academic types leave them behind. I think the offer would be there, they’re at least as valuable as Houston or Cincinnati I would think.

I think Stanford and Cal will try to stay aligned with Duke, Wake, BC, etc, but the lower tv money will force them to make some interesting choices.

['stache 21816]

3 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

West division

Wazzu, Beavs, Boise, SDSU, Fresno, UNLV

 

East Division

CSU, AFA, UTSA, Rice, Tulane, Memphis

 

That's probably the best scenario for the "newPAC" until the ACC implodes, as the winner would get the G6 autobid in most years.

Memphis would have a game in CO and two games out West every year.  Would that be worth it to be in the best G6 league ?  (That league should make more tv money than any other G6.)

 

If the tv contract is higher, I could see the west division being as it is now, and the east division being the best of the AAC. 

West: WSU, ORST, Boise, SDSU, Fresno, CSU (maybe AFA, UNLV, USU).

East: Memphis, Tulane, UTSA, USF, FAU, ECU (maybe Birmingham, UNT, Tulsa).

 

[USC Traveler 488]

9 minutes ago, 'stache said:

If the tv contract is higher, I could see the west division being as it is now, and the east division being the best of the AAC. 

West: WSU, ORST, Boise, SDSU, Fresno, CSU (maybe AFA, UNLV, USU).

East: Memphis, Tulane, UTSA, USF, FAU, ECU (maybe Birmingham, UNT, Tulsa).

 

Good call- going bigger makes it easier to sell the top AAC schools, as the travel stays mostly regional.  App State would be another possibility for the eastern division.  Having all the top G6 programs in one conference would make for a better tv product.

Edited September 12 by USC Traveler

[TxEx84 404]

I think the Pac6 wet dream is to pull Stanford and Cal back after they realize the travel is a nightmare.  Holding two spots for them before adding anyone else.

[USC Traveler 488]

From the Beavs' 247 board, fwiw:

Quote

Fresno Alum/Donor that I work with told me this morning that he was told the next two are already a done deal. He is hearing Memphis and Tulane but not 100% sure.

 

[LTbear 4170]

5 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

From the Beavs' 247 board, fwiw:

 

Interesante

[billfromlaketravis 11485]

11 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

From the Beavs' 247 board, fwiw:

 

Yikes?

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

43 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

West division

Wazzu, Beavs, Boise, SDSU, Fresno, UNLV

 

East Division

CSU, AFA, UTSA, Rice, Tulane, Memphis

 

That's probably the best scenario for the "newPAC" until the ACC implodes, as the winner would get the G6 autobid in most years.

Memphis would have a game in CO and two games out West every year.  Would that be worth it to be in the best G6 league ?  (That league should make more tv money than any other G6.)

 

In 2024 why are you still doing divisions? Divisions are pointless

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

Divisions aren’t pointless unless you have too many teams to do a divisional round robin.

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

24 minutes ago, TxEx84 said:

I think the Pac6 wet dream is to pull Stanford and Cal back after they realize the travel is a nightmare.  Holding two spots for them before adding anyone else.

IMO those schools are going to be fucked in a few years anyhow. Those two schools fucked over OSU and WSU so IMO OSU and WSU should tell them to go fuck themselves. 

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

Just now, Doc Daneeka said:

Divisions aren’t pointless unless you have too many teams to do a divisional round robin.

No major conference is doing divisions anymore....at all. It's fucking pointless to even have them. Especially in a 8 or 10 team conference where you have 9 conference games. 

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

No major conference is doing divisions anymore....at all. It's fucking pointless to even have them. Especially in a 8 or 10 team conference where you have 9 conference games. 

You keep saying it’s pointless, but you don’t explain why. I think it’s pretty clear why 16 and 18 team conferences might not want them. 

Why isn’t having a regular season rematch in a conference championship game “pointless”?

Edited September 12 by Doc Daneeka

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

1 minute ago, Doc Daneeka said:

You keep saying it’s pointless, but you don’t explain why. I think it’s pretty clear why 16 and 18 team conferences might not want them. 

Why isn’t having a regular season rematch in a conference championship game “pointless”?

Why have divisions for an 8-10 team conference when everyteam will play each other regardless? You just do what every other conference has moved to and put your two best teams at the end of the year in the conference title. You don't need need divisions to figure out who needs to play.

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

Just now, BurntOrange&White said:

Why have divisions for an 8-10 team conference when everyteam will play each other regardless? You just do what every other conference has moved to and put your two best teams at the end of the year in the conference title. You don't need need divisions to figure out who needs to play.

To avoid a rematch in a championship game, for one. 

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

2 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

To avoid a rematch in a championship game, for one. 

Who gives a shit if it’s a rematch? Certainly not viewers. You don’t want some really good team curb stomping a shitty team in the CCG. That’s worse for ratings. You want your best matchups regardless of rematch or not for that.  Especially given your limited inventory of big matchups

Edited September 12 by BurntOrange&White

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

Just now, BurntOrange&White said:

Who gives a shit if it’s a rematch? Certainly not viewers. You don’t want some really good team curb stomping a shitty team in the CCG. That’s worse for ratings. You want your best matchups regardless of rematch or not for that.  

I give a shit. 

How do you know the other division winner is shitty?

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

1 minute ago, Doc Daneeka said:

I give a shit. 

How do you know the other division winner is shitty?

Too bad nobody gives a fuck about your dog shit thoughts and why every major conference does best vs best and did away with divisions. 

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

Just now, BurntOrange&White said:

Too bad nobody gives a fuck about your dog shit thoughts and why every major conference does best vs best and did away with divisions. 

When did the major conferences do that?

If you don’t want to know who cares, don’t fucking ask.

[LTbear 4170]

12 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

IMO those schools are going to be fucked in a few years anyhow. Those two schools fucked over OSU and WSU so IMO OSU and WSU should tell them to go fuck themselves. 

Not sure how Cal and Furd fucked OSU and WSU. Were they supposed to turn down an offer from a surviving P5 conference?

[Texas Wahoo 3397]

1 minute ago, LTbear said:

Not sure how Cal and Furd fucked OSU and WSU. Were they supposed to turn down an offer from a surviving P5 conference?

Just because it was probably in their best interests and almost anyone else would have done it in their shoes does not mean they didn't fuck OSU and WSU over.  Almost every instance of someone getting fucked over is when someone else does something in their best interests.

[Rimbo 25938]

the thing nobody considers in all this is that USAF can go anywhere. they can just fly themselves to wherever they need to play

['stache 21816]

17 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

No major conference is doing divisions anymore....at all. It's fucking pointless to even have them. Especially in a 8 or 10 team conference where you have 9 conference games. 

I think it would make sense in a 12 team PAC as proposed. Travel costs matter more because the TV money still isn't going to be huge, and the divisions as proposed don't have any historical ties between them. I've thought through splitting the Big 12 into divisions or pods and its a nightmare because every scenario requires separating remnants of the old Big 8 and/or Big 12, which are the only historical ties that still exist within the conference.

[LTbear 4170]

4 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Just because it was probably in their best interests and almost anyone else would have done it in their shoes does not mean they didn't fuck OSU and WSU over.  Almost every instance of someone getting fucked over is when someone else does something in their best interests.

I mean, if you really want to stretch the term, sure I guess. Cal and Stanford were the last two clinging onto lifeboats, not the teams that sunk the ship. 

[TKthunder2 4991]

5 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

the thing nobody considers in all this is that USAF can go anywhere. they can just fly themselves to wherever they need to play

I see them joining the WCC for all nonfb sports and The American for football…time will tell.

[JBJ 3654]

1 hour ago, Laxtonto said:

What makes this weird is the thing the new PacX has to offer is PAc after dark. So I am guessing that the late windows on Thurs, Fri, & Sat are much better when there is atleast one "brand" involved. If the new Pac can roll up one or two additional brands, then their TV deal will probably be OK. It might be a situation that it is less about market footprint and more about knowing this is going to be about being the main late night ESPN anchor that will be going against USC/UCLA and the ACC twins.

The MW already offers the same thing.

[TKthunder2 4991]

6 minutes ago, JBJ said:

The MW already offers the same thing.

So does the Big 12.

[JBJ 3654]

Just now, TKthunder2 said:

So does the Big 12.

And with better brands than anything Pac will pull. 

Either way, it's a good thought for fans like us that want maximum football, but for networks the late night games don't draw viewers.  It's one of the reasons Pac imploded to begin with.

[USC Traveler 488]

43 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

In 2024 why are you still doing divisions? Divisions are pointless

Reduce travel costs for schools making a fraction of the tv money that the BIG and SEC make.

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

 

 

Which logo should they go with?

[petscii 1189]

2 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

Reduce travel costs for schools making a fraction of the tv money that the BIG and SEC make.

R E L E G A T I O N  is the next logical step.

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

Which logo should they go with?

the second one looks better in binary for 2.   

[TKthunder2 4991]

Just now, JBJ said:

And with better brands than anything Pac will pull. 

Either way, it's a good thought for fans like us that want maximum football, but for networks the late night games don't draw viewers.  It's one of the reasons Pac imploded to begin with.

The late window draws an inflated number of viewers. It allows school like WSU and OSU to pull in more casual viewers than they have any chance to in the regular viewing windows. It will generally never pull more than 3 million (Colorado/Co State is the exception to this rule) but it allows team that would struggle to pull in a million during daylight hours to possibly hit 2 million with the right combination of teams and competitiveness. Now that every conference other than the SEC has a west coast team, you’ll see them take advantage of this and boost their viewership numbers as often as they can.

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

22 minutes ago, LTbear said:

I mean, if you really want to stretch the term, sure I guess. Cal and Stanford were the last two clinging onto lifeboats, not the teams that sunk the ship. 

I'm trying to recall but wasn't it a Cal or Stanford admin that balked at the 30 million dollar deal they were all offered in 2022?

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

11 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

Reduce travel costs for schools making a fraction of the tv money that the BIG and SEC make.

Travel cost is irrelevant in 2024. Put everyone on PJ's and lets get this conference to 10 members

[petscii 1189]

6 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I'm trying to recall but wasn't it a Cal or Stanford admin that balked at the 30 million dollar deal they were all offered in 2022?

I believe it was Stanford. It's my second favorite school after Texas. But they did this to themselves.   

They nixxed several deals in the past 20 years that would have improved their lot, now they are in the ACC for a 30% tv share.  Fuck'Em.

Edited September 12 by petscii

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

Just now, petscii said:

I believe it was Stanford. It's my second favorite school after Texas. But they did this to themselves.   

They nixxed several deals in the past 20 years that would have improved their lot, now they are in the ACC.  Fuck'Em.

Yup exactly...I knew it was one them. So yeah Stanford can go fuck themselves and Cal can too for their BoR making UCLA subsidize their bitch ass program that doesn't give a fuck about footbal. In fact neither of these schools give a shit about football so I hope their programs die.

[thunderlounge 7837]

24 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

the thing nobody considers in all this is that USAF can go anywhere. they can just fly themselves to wherever they need to play

I know this was intended to be humorous, and is, but it’s also true.

 

Now, moving onto other discussion. 
 

For the P4, yes, divisions are over for the most part from here on out. 
 

For these steaming piles of tv audiences, not so much.

If the pac were to put 8 on the east and west, they could do division rr, plus 4 from other div, leaving one ooc.

This reduces travel, helps their inventory going to market (11 conf games), and keeps a lot of regionally important matchups. They’ll need that, plus the 11 games, in order to have any semblance of a tv deal. It won’t be much, even when maximized, but it would be a little more than what they make now.

They could go 9/9, but really they're going to struggle to get to 12, let alone 16-18.

“After Dark” spots are limited already, see: b1g/b12/acc.  In order to survive they will have to really think outside the box.

You can’t force a P4 model onto a g6 conference. They just don’t have the budgets, and still won’t even if the tv deal is at its best.

In the end, it doesn’t really matter. They’re going to at best be the “best of the rest”, and much national exposure will be limited.

Only so many slots overall, and the consolidation at the top is taking most of those slots already.

 

[petscii 1189]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Yup exactly...I knew it was one them. So yeah Stanford can go fuck themselves and Cal can too for their BoR making UCLA subsidize their bitch ass program that doesn't give a fuck about footbal. In fact neither of these schools give a shit about football so I hope their *FOOTBALL* programs die.

Stanford does a lot for the olympic sports side of things, and I hope that does not suffer.  Stanford Baseball (and Cal Baseball) is a good thing.

[TKthunder2 4991]

4 minutes ago, petscii said:

Stanford does a lot for the olympic sports side of things, and I hope that does not suffer.  Stanford Baseball (and Cal Baseball) is a good thing.

 

Fuck tree.

[USC Traveler 488]

16 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Travel cost is irrelevant in 2024. Put everyone on PJ's and lets get this conference to 10 members

They're relevant when your tv deal is worth less than $10m per school.

[bullet 1597]

6 hours ago, LTbear said:

WSU and OSU have all the PAC settlement money (several tens of millions) to help with that. 

Its going to cost $111 million just for those 4 schools.  $17 each exit fees and $43 million as part of the contract with the MWC.

I just don't see how its worth it to dump a few schools.  There really isn't much difference in the MWC after Boise St.

 

[Sbbruin 21856]

19 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Travel cost is irrelevant in 2024. Put everyone on PJ's and lets get this conference to 10 members

It's not irrelevant when you include all the other sports.  Football should be its own separate deal.

[bullet 1597]

5 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I think it's funny that the MWC formally said "nah" to the merger proposal and is now getting raided by those they rejected.

It's like they learned nothing from the Pac 12 rejecting the Irate 8.  It's the exact same scenario playing out the next rung down the ladder.

No.  Its WSU/OSU who didn't want to merge.  MWC was all for it.

[bullet 1597]

5 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I think there's certainly a chance.  I'm just not sure those do any more for you than schools like UNLV or Air Force. 

I would be curious to get the Texan perspective, but from the outside it seems like Texas State and UTSA are the G5 Texas schools with the biggest upside in terms of actually drawing a following.  I might have put UNT there at one point, but it seems like those places have more of a base for whatever reason.

I don't think Texas St. has any upside potential.   The students all go to Austin on weekends.  Its only 30 miles form Austin.