Jump to content

Realignment talk not going away

The Tower

By The Tower
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Recommended

Posted by Sandbagging Steve,

How many teams will be left when the dust settles in a few years? I think there's a way for all the teams to still have some involvement. I will explain that at the end of this list. Here's my list of the top 32 programs and a list if it goes to 48. There's some debate if it goes to 48, but not much debate if it stops at 32. I guess one could debate Arizona State, but that's about it. The top 32 at least come close to carrying their own weight. Everyone below that line is losing money for t

This is great content for free.

Recommended by immamac

  • Hook 'Em

6 reactions

Go to this post
Upgrayedd

Upgrayedd 5803

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Welshy said:

If there's one school the Big 12 doesn't give a fuck about adding, it's ASU. They already have a slutU.

Also, say hello to Big12 refs, you desert dwelling morons. They are going to open you up. Ask any UT fan. 

Tech, OkSt, Utah, Arizona won't be too worried about whatever you spit. EVERYONE else will hate you like the black death. Great intro.

Welcome to the family, you lousy cunts. Also, byeeeeeee!

 

Seriously, Arizona State is too good for the Big 12?

Fucking hell. This is what's wrong with the PAC in a nutshell.

I think I’m going enjoy this.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 36.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bullet

    1507

  • Hurtlocker

    1322

  • Al_4_ISU

    1079

  • BurntOrange&White

    976

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Hiphopopotamos
Hiphopopotamos
MAUFRAIS
MAUFRAIS

Aggy should abstain so the vote is 13-0 and then we can then brand it on their dog.

jofus
jofus

Posted Images

BurntOrange&White

BurntOrange&White 39486

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, elfenix said:

Anyone have a list of how much money the schools are making in the new conferences?

About the same. New B1G should make a little more than big 12 by 5-10 million once post seasons are paid out. Think the BIG schools will earn more as years go

Edited by BurntOrange&White
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank_Hill

Hank_Hill 18457

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Welshy said:

If there's one school the Big 12 doesn't give a fuck about adding, it's ASU. They already have a slutU.

Also, say hello to Big12 refs, you desert dwelling morons. They are going to open you up. Ask any UT fan. 

Tech, OkSt, Utah, Arizona won't be too worried about whatever you spit. EVERYONE else will hate you like the black death. Great intro.

Welcome to the family, you lousy cunts. Also, byeeeeeee!

 

Seriously, Arizona State is too good for the Big 12?

Fucking hell. This is what's wrong with the PAC in a nutshell.

That generic ass statement saying nothing negative about the Big 12 got you that worked up huh?

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welshy

Welshy 907

Posted
Posted (edited)

They are spot on, they just didn't go into the politics of it all. Overriding theme: PAC did this to themselves at every step. And not in hindsight...wrong decisions at every step, fueled by arrogance and hubris. Mostly from Stanford and Cal, but some from shitty two-faced blockage from USC.

Makes me angry, what could have been...UT should be in the PAC (old PAC). WAY more aligned with Cal, UCLA, USC, UW, OU UO than...Bamer? Vanderbilt? GA? MsSt., OlMiss, Missouri? UF? Souf Carolina? Auburn? Fuck that. 

 

Edited by Welshy
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welshy

Welshy 907

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

Does anyone find it humorous that the 4 schools left in the PAC are the two smartest highest level research universities in Silicon Valley that only want to associate with non religious AAU schools…and a pair of rural non AAU ag schools?

If you were to list all former PAC12 schools on a spectrum Cal/Stanford would be in one side and WSU/OSU would be on the other.

Sec 5 AAU

Big 12 5AAU

Pac 4, 2 AAU

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welshy

Welshy 907

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

They are spot on, the just didn't go into the politics of it all. Overriding theme: PAC did this to themselves at every step. And not in hindsight...wrong decisions at every step, fueled by arrogance and hubris. Mostly from Stanford and Cal, but some from shitty two-faced blockage from USC.

Makes me angry, what could have been...UT should be in the PAC (old PAC). WAY more aligned with Cal, UCLA, USC, UW, OU UO than...Bamer? Vanderbilt? GA? MsSt., OMiss, Missouri? UF? Souf Carolina? Auburn? Fuck that. 

 

Edited by Welshy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welshy

Welshy 907

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Welshy said:

I might be drunk. 

I'd like to edit that BLLLLAAAGGHHHUGHUHGHHMGHHGUUUUUUUGH. HUUUUGHHHHH. I'm OKHHHHUUUUUUGGGGHHH. HUH! HUHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok. Ok. Ok. Ok. ...Ok...OK.... Wait. Ok. Ugh.... Ugh.... SIGH... ...Ugh....

Want to come clean.

Just Wait. Ok. Ok. Ok. Wait. 

...OK.

I'm actually drunk. HHHHHHHHHUUUUUGHHHHH! HUUUUHGH BLLLLLLLAAAAHHHHHHHHHUUUUUHHHHH. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Reynolds Woodcock

Reynolds Woodcock 4656

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
8 hours ago, Welshy said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHIDIOT.

 

8 hours ago, Welshy said:

It's amazing how quickly enormous debt is catching up with the entire left-coast all at once. Football, government and otherwise.

Maybe you're not elite? Not smarter? Not better? Just throwing that out there.

As someone who lived in the Carmel Valley for 20 years, I can tell you that just about everyone I met absolutely believes, without any doubt, that the 270 million people in the US who don't live in California are complete Neanderthals. Glad Cal and Stanford are cut adrift. Wish USC and UCLA were too, but I'll take what I can get.  

 

7 hours ago, Welshy said:

That's the funniest shit I've ever seen. Cal cares less about its students than Stanford...and that's a lot less than atm, bamer or WVU does. This is one of, and not the only reason why, AAU sucks. These schools operate in very rarified research circles. They are not good educators. The 30-100 thousand students who attend and spend massive amounts of money at these schools are generally taught by student teachers, then by junior, non tenured professors. Think I'm wrong? Do you think those professors getting 10s of millions or 100s of millions of dollars for research are teaching 1 or 2 or 3k classes?

They are not. 

Generally speaking, what the top 50 schools in the country consider education is exactly NOT education. It's a scam. And they know it. And don't care. 

Cry me a river, Cal. Manage your goddamn bills. 

 

6 hours ago, Welshy said:

If there's one school the Big 12 doesn't give a fuck about adding, it's ASU. They already have a slutU.

Also, say hello to Big12 refs, you desert dwelling morons. They are going to open you up. Ask any UT fan. 

Tech, OkSt, Utah, Arizona won't be too worried about whatever you spit. EVERYONE else will hate you like the black death. Great intro.

Welcome to the family, you lousy cunts. Also, byeeeeeee!

 

Seriously, Arizona State is too good for the Big 12?

Fucking hell. This is what's wrong with the PAC in a nutshell.

 

3 hours ago, Welshy said:

I'd like to edit that BLLLLAAAGGHHHUGHUHGHHMGHHGUUUUUUUGH. HUUUUGHHHHH. I'm OKHHHHUUUUUUGGGGHHH. HUH! HUHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok. Ok. Ok. Ok. ...Ok...OK.... Wait. Ok. Ugh.... Ugh.... SIGH... ...Ugh....

Want to come clean.

Just Wait. Ok. Ok. Ok. Wait. 

...OK.

I'm actually drunk. HHHHHHHHHUUUUUGHHHHH! HUUUUHGH BLLLLLLLAAAAHHHHHHHHHUUUUUHHHHH. 

 

Jesus buddy, take a fucking Xanax or find a friend on a Friday night.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5406

Posted
Posted (edited)

So, bad news for SMU? If the PAC had stayed at six teams, they could have added SDSU and SMU and stayed a P5. At four teams, I don’t think it works. 
 
I’ll give TCU this- after the SWC breakup, they did the hard work of getting their attendance up significantly to the 30,000’s, and when they joined the B12, they got into the 40s. (They also hired one of the most impactful coaches in state of Texas history, and I’m not talking about Dennis Franchione). 
 
SMU wants to make the same jump, but without having to do the same work. Supposedly, they are ready to fund some serious NIL, but it won’t have the same impact without being in a major conference. This gruntles me. 
 
So does Oregon, and their Nike NIL, not being in a conference that plays in Texas. 
 
And, hey, look! SDSU gets Conference games with Stanford and Cal, like they have always wanted, if the MW merges with the PAC!

Edited by statsman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zhorn96

Zhorn96 1772

Posted
Posted (edited)

Cal’s leadership has really fucked themselves.  Chancellor is retiring and doesn’t give a fuck and the AD is an incompetent who is likely getting fired for covering up the abuse from the c bag swim coach.  Cal BMDs are pissed.  They know there is a number where the Big10 takes them and Furd and they’ve told the Chancellor to go get it.

ACC was a thing for a while too apparently.  Rev sports would’ve been national with the non rev regional and while discussions aren’t dead (add SDSU with the remaining 4 for example), UO and UW being out… that’s looking like it is on life support.

My guess is that Cal and Stanford go hat in hand to the Big 10 and take whatever pittance they can get to gain membership.  BMDs know they have to get the unengaged donor money involved (and there is a lot out there) to bridge some of the spending gap over the next decade or so.  Will believe that when I see it, frankly. But the Big10 does want them, it’s just a question how much much the TV networks will pay additionally.  I’m guessing $20m per team to start.  We’ll see…

Edited by Zhorn96
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gatormarc

gatormarc 904

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I don’t necessarily think the BIG wants cal and Stanford. 

I'm not sure the B1G knows what it wants and hasn't for awhile.

They're so focused on making more money than the SEC, hoping that that will solve the problem that they keep adding side hustles.

  • Like 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34168

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

About the same. New B1G should make a little more than big 12 by 5-10 million once post seasons are paid out. Think the BIG schools will earn more as years go

but how much is that?  buck o' five?  t'ree fiddy?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dnaguy

Dnaguy 11740

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, statsman said:

So, bad news for SMU? If the PAC had stayed at six teams, they could have added SDSU and SMU and stayed a P5. At four teams, I don’t think it works. 
 
I’ll give TCU this- after the SWC breakup, they did the hard work of getting their attendance up significantly to the 30,000’s, and when they joined the B12, they got into the 40s. (They also hired one of the most impactful coaches in state of Texas history, and I’m not talking about Dennis Franchione). 
 
SMU wants to make the same jump, but without having to do the same work. Supposedly, they are ready to fund some serious NIL, but it won’t have the same impact without being in a major conference. This gruntles me. 
 
So does Oregon, and their Nike NIL, not being in a conference that plays in Texas. 
 
And, hey, look! SDSU gets Conference games with Stanford and Cal, like they have always wanted, if the MW merges with the PAC!

 

I guess SMU has a shot if AND only if the remaining PAC schools somehow keep their conference and raid the MWC.

My guess is that they would dump Wyoming or New Mexico and take SMU instead.

Big effin' if though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
horn_of_the_morning

horn_of_the_morning 978

Posted
Posted

This has probably been discussed here in the past, but I thought this was interesting. After Texas and OU left for SEC, Big12 was in a bad shape and Bowlsby basically offered the whole conference to Pac12 for some kind of a merger/alignment. The Pac12 rejected. How the turn tables. Starts from around 31 min mark in the below video.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 32685

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, horn_of_the_morning said:

This has probably been discussed here in the past, but I thought this was interesting. After Texas and OU left for SEC, Big12 was in a bad shape and Bowlsby basically offered the whole conference to Pac12 for some kind of a merger/alignment. The Pac12 rejected. How the turn tables. Starts from around 31 min mark in the below video.

 

 

But you have to remember that conferences are just schools voting together. As of this morning 4 of those Pac-12 schools would consider themselves in a better position, 4 are in essentially the same position, and only 4 are worse off than if the Pac-12/Big 12 merger had happened.

So even if all 12 schools went back in time to that decision right now it still wouldn't happen. 4 of them say no because they're in the Big 10 now and that's enough to kill it. And even if it was just a majority vote 4 more of them say no because they still have the Big 12 as a fallback option while they see if a do-over changes anything for the better. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dnaguy

Dnaguy 11740

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

So if the merger had happened, we’d have ORST, WSU, Cal, and Stanford instead of BYU, UCF, UH, and Cincy. I’d prefer the merger still, but the other adds arguably are better for tv ratings and give a shit.

Strictly speaking on a 'can I get to an away game' then the later is much better. Everyone one of those places has a major airport.

A conference with Morgantown, Corvalis, Aimes, Manhattan, and Pullman effin' is brutal.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcar00

dcar00 14023

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, demos said:


Arguably it started when they let those weirdos from Arkansas in, which eventually sealed the deal on SWC and led to the creation of the Big 12.

just arkansas leaving wasn't the issue.  they got Ark and SC and created the SEC champ game which was a revenue generator that the other conferences didn't have.  If Texas football wasn't so fucking disfunctional in the late 80's and early 90's and they might have held it off a bit longer but we couldn't even win that shitty conference on the reg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LTtxfan

LTtxfan 48928

Posted
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, 'stache said:

So if the merger had happened, we’d have ORST, WSU, Cal, and Stanford instead of BYU, UCF, UH, and Cincy. I’d prefer the merger still, but the other adds arguably are better for tv ratings and give a shit.

Zona fans are glad to get to the B12 because most B12 football fans give a shit while several PAC12 football teams fans sucked.  

Utah fans rock, AzSt has the ladies, and Colorado has better fan energy now with Deion.

So who in the "New B12" will be considered the strongest football schools now??

 

Edited by LTtxfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TKthunder2

TKthunder2 4975

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Dnaguy said:

 

I guess SMU has a shot if AND only if the remaining PAC schools somehow keep their conference and raid the MWC.

My guess is that they would dump Wyoming or New Mexico and take SMU instead.

Big effin' if though.

If they could find a way to dump San Jose State (don’t need a 3rd Bay Area school) and replace with SMU that would optimal. But with the MWC exit fee and short timeline I don’t see how that plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gatormarc

gatormarc 904

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

If say 6 schools left the acc would that void the gor?

The GoR is pretty looks like it assigns each school individually to the deal.

So the ACC could cease to exist and the GoR would still be there attached to those now 15 individual schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zhorn96

Zhorn96 1772

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I don’t necessarily think the BIG wants cal and Stanford. 

IMO They absolutely do from a non sports perspective.  Global top tier academics, billions in annual research, arguably the 2 best libraries in the world… blah blah blah.  Conference membership gives the other schools access to all that.  Sports wise, removing the rev sports, you’ve got 2 of the top 10-15 programs in the nation.  Rev sports have largely sucked in the past few years but Cal BMDs dumped $2m+ into a new bball roster that will win 20 games next season.  Football raised ~$5m and spent about $3m in getting a dozen or so transfers that filled in a lot of the depth holes.  Football will be better this season and if the QB hits and the OL is fixed to at least “average”, they have a shot at 8-9 wins.  They need to revamp the athletic department and get some new blood in which hopefully happens when Knowlton gets fired.  But the investment in program relevance is already happening.

so would the Big18 take them at a massive discount?  I think so.  Especially if Apple gets brought in for 4th tier rights as is rumored.  West coast volume inventory is still valuable to some degree

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BurntOrange&White

BurntOrange&White 39486

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Zhorn96 said:

IMO They absolutely do from a non sports perspective.  Global top tier academics, billions in annual research, arguably the 2 best libraries in the world… blah blah blah.  Conference membership gives the other schools access to all that.  Sports wise, removing the rev sports, you’ve got 2 of the top 10-15 programs in the nation.  Rev sports have largely sucked in the past few years but Cal BMDs dumped $2m+ into a new bball roster that will win 20 games next season.  Football raised ~$5m and spent about $3m in getting a dozen or so transfers that filled in a lot of the depth holes.  Football will be better this season and if the QB hits and the OL is fixed to at least “average”, they have a shot at 8-9 wins.  They need to revamp the athletic department and get some new blood in which hopefully happens when Knowlton gets fired.  But the investment in program relevance is already happening.

so would the Big18 take them at a massive discount?  I think so.  Especially if Apple gets brought in for 4th tier rights as is rumored.  West coast volume inventory is still valuable to some degree

Why do you think academics matter? That's your first mistake. Cal literally brings nothing to an athletic conference except debt and a football program they DO NOT care about. They also bring nothing in terms of television viewership or attendance. 

Edited by BurntOrange&White
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...