Does OSU and WSU want to be in a conference with deadweights of UNLV, Wyoming, Colorado State, New Mexico and San Jose State? They rather take the top 7 to join them because the MWC's media deal is low because of the deadweights.

The MWC schools aren’t going to want to have to pay to get out of their current league to go join WSU and OSU in the PAC shell. They will make the duo come to them.

(09-28-2022 11:45 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(09-28-2022 11:31 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-28-2022 11:27 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  In the worst case scenario where USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, UO, and UW go to the B1G, while AZ, ASU, Utah, and CU go to the Big 12, leaving just WSU and Or. St., I STILL think the Pac-12 holds the edge to raid the MW and/or AAC.

First, I don't think everyone is going to be announced as leaving all in succession before the Pac first invites some MW/AAC schools. I'm sure they are already at least considering San Diego State and another school (I'd guess SMU). That would set the precedent as the Pac having the leg up over G5 leagues, enabling the Pac to reload as neededbfrom the G5. It's like when the AAC floated the idea of raiding the Big 12, and the Big 12 quickly put that to rest by grabbing Cincy, UCF, and Houston.

Second, an more importantly, the MW and AAC are not autonomy conferences, and they're not going to be in the future, either. The Pac-12 does have autonomy privileges, and that is not disappearing unless the league dissolves. Why would anyone leave an autonomy conference for a non-autonomy conference, and why would a non-autonomy school not leave for an autonomy conference?

Sometimes Conference A loses schools to Conference B (SBC losing schools to C-USA; Summit losing UMKC to WAC), then years later Conference B loses schools to Conference A. But Autonomy losing to non-autonomy? Someone please explain that one to me.

Autonomy will be taken away if the Pac is down to WSU and OSU. The only question is whether some of the MWC want to leave other members behind or they stick together and WSU and OSU have to join them. Probably take the Pac name either way. With only 2 schools, the new conference would have to take nearly the entire MWC, so its more likely they stick together.

That's where I argue that the Pac-12 NEEDS to offer SDSU, if no one else, membership ASAP. Gotta be proactive. And I think SDSU would accept. So would any other MW school or AAC school. They would accept because the northern schools might NOT leave, and the four corners might NOT leave. All they know for sure is that right now. even without the LA schools, the Pac is worth millions more than the MW. They know the Pac 12 is head and shoulders the stronger league. Are they really going to gamble that the Pac gets whittled all the way down to WSU and Or. St.? That's extremely risky, and university leaders are risk-averse. Even if the Pac eventually does get whittled down to WSU and Or. St. as the only continuous members, the Pac should have time to reload and reload as it goes with the MW and AAC members of its choice.

Another precedent is the Big East/AAC over C-USA. Back in the 2010-2014 realignment cycle, the BE/AAC got whittled down to Cincy, USF, and UConn as the only continuous members. But the Big East/AAC had BCS autobid status and had proactively already invited multiple C-USA members in. Did those invited members renege on their invitations because of all the Big East/AAC's losses? Absolutely not. Did Cincy/USF/UConn join C-USA? No.

As FranktheTank puts it, s*** always rolls downhill.

SDSU would be keen to accept even if the deal is for just 5-7 years, given the current projected lineup. Even the loss of WA and Oregon would make it a more attractive conference than the MW. However, if the Zona schools bolt for the B12 then they would likely petition to tag along with them.

(09-29-2022 03:23 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Does OSU and WSU want to be in a conference with deadweights of UNLV, Wyoming, Colorado State, New Mexico and San Jose State? They rather take the top 7 to join them because the MWC's media deal is low because of the deadweights.

Why would the top MWC trade their deadweights for the PAC's deadweights?

(09-28-2022 12:24 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  One thing to consider is that simply having a conference in and of itself has a lot of value. Putting aside whether the Pac-12 would continue to have autonomy status if it really did get down to Washington State and Oregon State, the new CFP that prioritizes conference champs and the existing NCAA Tournament that has conference champ auto-bids provide huge incentives to NOT dissolve a league structure when you have one in place.

So, I could certainly see Washington State and Oregon State using that Pac-12 structure to try to effectively create a "best of the rest" league taking the top schools from the MWC and AAC and maybe even add in Gonzaga as a non-football member for basketball. A 10-team league that is securely the 5th best league (even if it's not receiving current P5-level money) *does* have a lot of value in a world where the CFP is providing auto-bids to the top 6 conference champs along with the NCAA Tournament auto-bid in place. That's not easy, but it can't be discounted because there's simply so much value in simply having an existing league structure in place.

I was about to post something similar. Yes, conferences have resources. Anyone who doesn't get a call up is going to stick around and take advantage of that capital.

I suspect it would be like when the Big East was down to just USF, UConn and Cincy - the "PAC" name would be enough for the MW schools to coalesce around the remaining PAC schools, no matter how few.

And I do not think this PAC would lose autonomy status. Their CFP and TV money would be reduced to G5 level, but I think Autonomy is forever.

(09-29-2022 02:29 AM)Realignment Wrote:  Lets say this all happens, then I think you have a new Pac-12 as....

Pac-12 West
Fresno State
Hawai'i
Oregon State
San Diego State
UNLV
Washington State

Pac-12 East
Boise State
Colorado State
New Mexico
Rice
SMU
Utah State
....

Say the PAC keeps six schools. As much as they can, they go forward 2-by-2 as they have for the past 100 years. They favor state schools with a lot of upside. The idea is to play a long game on a budget that holds down travel costs as much as possible.

What does that look like? The media gods only know what the spreadsheets look like, but say a path lets you build out to this:

Washington State
Oregon State
--
Boise
Wyoming
--
Fresno State
Nevada
--
Utah
Utah State
--
Colorado
Colorado State
--
San Diego State
UNLV
--
Arizona
Arizona State
--
New Mexico
Texas State

You're at 16 schools. Your footprint and identity make sense. ACC/ESPN agree to partner with you to provide Pacific and Mountain time zone games on their network—but they'd sure appreciate it if you could get into some bigger markets.

Now it's time to really hurt some feelings. Expand to 20 with:

Kansas
Kansas State
--
Oklahoma State
Texas Tech

(The screams alone will be worth it.)

'By 2036' the remaining members of the nB12 will be discussing moves west or east to get into a conference network. Consolidation is toward an M2.

The 2036ACC, taking hits from the P2, expands with Cincy, West Virginia, UCF and USF, Memphis and who knows. Its western edge reaches Rice and Houston. The 2036PAC, or whatever we'll call it, can now expand to 24 if it wants. The pool includes:

Hawaii
BYU
Air Force
TCU
Baylor
... assorted other Texas schools
... Montana and the Dakotas

Play ball.

(09-30-2022 09:29 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-29-2022 02:29 AM)Realignment Wrote:  Lets say this all happens, then I think you have a new Pac-12 as....

Pac-12 West
Fresno State
Hawai'i
Oregon State
San Diego State
UNLV
Washington State

Pac-12 East
Boise State
Colorado State
New Mexico
Rice
SMU
Utah State
....

Say the PAC keeps six schools. As much as they can, they go forward 2-by-2 as they have for the past 100 years. They favor state schools with a lot of upside. The idea is to play a long game on a budget that holds down travel costs as much as possible.

What does that look like? The media gods only know what the spreadsheets look like, but say a path lets you build out to this:

Washington State
Oregon State
--
Boise
Wyoming
--
Fresno State
Nevada
--
Utah
Utah State
--
Colorado
Colorado State
--
San Diego State
UNLV
--
Arizona
Arizona State
--
New Mexico
Texas State

You're at 16 schools. Your footprint and identity make sense. ACC/ESPN agree to partner with you to provide Pacific and Mountain time zone games on their network—but they'd sure appreciate it if you could get into some bigger markets.

Now it's time to really hurt some feelings. Expand to 20 with:

Kansas
Kansas State
--
Oklahoma State
Texas Tech

(The screams alone will be worth it.)

'By 2036' the remaining members of the nB12 will be discussing moves west or east to get into a conference network.

The 2036ACC, taking hits from the P2, expands with Cincy, West Virginia, UCF and USF. Its western edge reaches Rice and Houston. The 2036PAC, or whatever we'll call it, can expand to 24 by drawing from a pool including:

Hawaii
BYU
Air Force
TCU
Baylor
... assorted other Texas schools
... Montana and the Dakotas

Play ball.

I think Colorado and Kansas might escape this scenario. But otherwise, we could very well be looking at the future there...

(09-30-2022 09:37 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I think Colorado and Kansas might escape this scenario. But otherwise, we could very well be looking at the future there...

Yeah. Of course, any target can get a P2 call up. And this is a lot easier to build out if you first keep UCLA and Cal.

Still, Colorado's president is the one who's been most insistent that the remaining PAC members plan to stay together. He sounds like he expects to go as Washington State and Arizona go, and he's understanding them as feeling the same way.

That's information in hand. So what can these schools do?

I'd say they can still do quite a bit.

(09-30-2022 07:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I suspect it would be like when the Big East was down to just USF, UConn and Cincy - the "PAC" name would be enough for the MW schools to coalesce around the remaining PAC schools, no matter how few.

And I do not think this PAC would lose autonomy status. Their CFP and TV money would be reduced to G5 level, but I think Autonomy is forever.

The C-USA programs signed on with the Big East when Rutgers, Louisville and the basketball schools were still on board. The Big East wasn’t down to just USF, UCONN and Cincinnati at that point. In addition, it wasn’t 100% clear when the C-USA teams signed on that the Big East’s major bowl berth would be taken away.


This really isn’t comparable to the situation when the C-USA teams joined the Big East in late 2011 and early 2012.

And the football teams must have ultimately not found much value in the name “Big East”, since they sold the name to the basketball schools after the bball teams left the conference.

(09-30-2022 10:08 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 09:37 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I think Colorado and Kansas might escape this scenario. But otherwise, we could very well be looking at the future there...

Yeah. Of course, any target can get a P2 call up. And this is a lot easier to build out if you first keep UCLA and Cal.

Still, Colorado's president is the one who's been most insistent that the remaining PAC members plan to stay together. He sounds like he expects to go as Washington State and Arizona go, and he's understanding them as feeling the same way.

That's information in hand. So what can these schools do?

I'd say they can still do quite a bit.

Colorado’s actually been the most open about possibly joining the Big 12. They held something like 6 different BOT meetings focused solely on conference realignment. They’ve decided to stay in the PAC unless there are further defections, but about 30% of their administrators were in favor of joining the Big 12.

(09-29-2022 03:47 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(09-28-2022 11:45 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(09-28-2022 11:31 AM)bullet Wrote:  [quote='Michael in Raleigh' pid='18477251' dateline='1664382463']
In the worst case scenario where USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, UO, and UW go to the B1G, while AZ, ASU, Utah, and CU go to the Big 12, leaving just WSU and Or. St., I STILL think the Pac-12 holds the edge to raid the MW and/or AAC.

First, I don't think everyone is going to be announced as leaving all in succession before the Pac first invites some MW/AAC schools. I'm sure they are already at least considering San Diego State and another school (I'd guess SMU). That would set the precedent as the Pac having the leg up over G5 leagues, enabling the Pac to reload as neededbfrom the G5. It's like when the AAC floated the idea of raiding the Big 12, and the Big 12 quickly put that to rest by grabbing Cincy, UCF, and Houston.

Second, an more importantly, the MW and AAC are not autonomy conferences, and they're not going to be in the future, either. The Pac-12 does have autonomy privileges, and that is not disappearing unless the league dissolves. Why would anyone leave an autonomy conference for a non-autonomy conference, and why would a non-autonomy school not leave for an autonomy conference?

Sometimes Conference A loses schools to Conference B (SBC losing schools to C-USA; Summit losing UMKC to WAC), then years later Conference B loses schools to Conference A. But Autonomy losing to non-autonomy? Someone please explain that one to me.

Autonomy will be taken away if the Pac is down to WSU and OSU. The only question is whether some of the MWC want to leave other members behind or they stick together and WSU and OSU have to join them. Probably take the Pac name either way. With only 2 schools, the new conference would have to take nearly the entire MWC, so its more likely they stick together.

That's where I argue that the Pac-12 NEEDS to offer SDSU, if no one else, membership ASAP. Gotta be proactive. And I think SDSU would accept. So would any other MW school or AAC school. They would accept because the northern schools might NOT leave, and the four corners might NOT leave. All they know for sure is that right now. even without the LA schools, the Pac is worth millions more than the MW. They know the Pac 12 is head and shoulders the stronger league. Are they really going to gamble that the Pac gets whittled all the way down to WSU and Or. St.? That's extremely risky, and university leaders are risk-averse. Even if the Pac eventually does get whittled down to WSU and Or. St. as the only continuous members, the Pac should have time to reload and reload as it goes with the MW and AAC members of its choice.

Another precedent is the Big East/AAC over C-USA. Back in the 2010-2014 realignment cycle, the BE/AAC got whittled down to Cincy, USF, and UConn as the only continuous members. But the Big East/AAC had BCS autobid status and had proactively already invited multiple C-USA members in. Did those invited members renege on their invitations because of all the Big East/AAC's losses? Absolutely not. Did Cincy/USF/UConn join C-USA? No.

As FranktheTank puts it, s*** always rolls downhill.

Conference USA and the WAC raided the SWC after 4 teams defected to the Big 12. That’s hardly **** rolling downhill.


The Sun Belt also raided Conference USA last year, which would have previously seemed unthinkable.


The Sun Belt/C-USA situation shows that a previously less prestigious conference can raid a more prestigious conference if the previously more prestigious conference gets decimated enough.


Yeah, and of course the Conference USA schools didn’t renege on their Big East invite after there were even more defections from the Big East. But that’s a separate question from whether they would have taken the Big East invites in the first place if they had known ahead of time that all those defections (and the Big East’s loss of AQ status) would occur.

(09-30-2022 10:54 AM)Poster Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:08 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 09:37 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I think Colorado and Kansas might escape this scenario. But otherwise, we could very well be looking at the future there...

Yeah. Of course, any target can get a P2 call up. And this is a lot easier to build out if you first keep UCLA and Cal.

Still, Colorado's president is the one who's been most insistent that the remaining PAC members plan to stay together. He sounds like he expects to go as Washington State and Arizona go, and he's understanding them as feeling the same way.

That's information in hand. So what can these schools do?

I'd say they can still do quite a bit.

Colorado’s actually been the most open about possibly joining the Big 12. They held something like 6 different BOT meetings focused solely on conference realignment. They’ve decided to stay in the PAC unless there are further defections, but about 30% of their administrators were in favor of joining the Big 12.

If Stanford and Cal stay in the PAC, Colorado stays. They are keen on pretending they are academic equals to Stanford and Cal (not even close), it is a Boulder thing... If Stanford and Cal leave the PAC, Colorado will try to move since they will not want to be tied to CSU, they are superior, again, a Boulder thing.

Would Boise, San Diego State, and Fresno rather be part of a Pac-#, or have Oregon State and Washington State join the MWC? Honestly, it's a no-brainer. The higher-end programs of the MWC have looked elsewhere in the past. If the rump of the PAC came calling, they'd pick up the phone on the first ring.

Does anybody have any info on how the division of the SWC assets went when the conference dissolved? I assume that the 8 Texas teams evenly split the assets, and Arkansas didn’t get a single cent since they were already in the SEC when the SWC dissolved.


Whatever the SWC either couldn’t sell or didn’t want to sell was put in an SWC museum at Texas Tech that still exists. I’m not really sure how the revenue from the visits to this museum is divided. (If Texas Tech gets a disproportionate amount of the museum revenue since it’s on their campus, and if Arkansas gets any revenue from the museum visits at all.)

If the other PAC teams can’t leave for the Big 10 until 2025, I suspect that USC and UCLA might push their own entrance to the Big 10 back a year just so they can get their share of the PAC assets. They wouldn’t be entitled to even a cent of the PAC’s assets if they leave just a year earlier than anybody else.

(09-30-2022 12:30 PM)Poster Wrote:  Does anybody have any info on how the division of the SWC assets went when the conference dissolved? I assume that the 8 Texas teams evenly split the assets, and Arkansas didn’t get a single cent since they were already in the SEC when the SWC dissolved.


Whatever the SWC either couldn’t sell or didn’t want to sell was put in an SWC museum at Texas Tech that still exists. I’m not really sure how the revenue from the visits to this museum is divided. (If Texas Tech gets a disproportionate amount of the museum revenue since it’s on their campus, and if Arkansas gets any revenue from the museum visits at all.)

If the other PAC teams can’t leave for the Big 10 until 2025, I suspect that USC and UCLA might push their own entrance to the Big 10 back a year just so they can get their share of the PAC assets. They wouldn’t be entitled to even a cent of the PAC’s assets if they leave just a year earlier than anybody else.

Pretty certain since they've announced their departure they are no longer entitled to any PAC assets in this mythical dissolution that's not happening anyway.

(09-30-2022 12:36 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:30 PM)Poster Wrote:  Does anybody have any info on how the division of the SWC assets went when the conference dissolved? I assume that the 8 Texas teams evenly split the assets, and Arkansas didn’t get a single cent since they were already in the SEC when the SWC dissolved.


Whatever the SWC either couldn’t sell or didn’t want to sell was put in an SWC museum at Texas Tech that still exists. I’m not really sure how the revenue from the visits to this museum is divided. (If Texas Tech gets a disproportionate amount of the museum revenue since it’s on their campus, and if Arkansas gets any revenue from the museum visits at all.)

If the other PAC teams can’t leave for the Big 10 until 2025, I suspect that USC and UCLA might push their own entrance to the Big 10 back a year just so they can get their share of the PAC assets. They wouldn’t be entitled to even a cent of the PAC’s assets if they leave just a year earlier than anybody else.

Pretty certain since they've announced their departure they are no longer entitled to any PAC assets in this mythical dissolution that's not happening anyway.

Every single member of the PAC would have announced their departure by the time the conference would dissolve, most likely on July 1, 2025. (Including Oregon State and WSU announcing their departure to the MWC.) If schools that had announced their departures couldn’t get the PAC assets, that would mean that literally nobody could get the PAC’s assets. You’re getting the division of assets confused with voting on future matters. (Ie the league’s future TV contracts.)


Anybody who’s a member of the PAC on the league’s last day of existence (June 30, 2025) should be legally entitled to the PAC’s assets, even if they’ve announced they’re leaving.

(09-29-2022 01:51 PM)ARSTATEFAN1986 Wrote:  If the Big 12 adds all six Pac teams left, which I think they will, then Oregon State and Washington State would be better off financially in the Big 12 as the PAC 12, according to reports is in bad shape financially.

Big 12: East - Central Florida, Cincinnati, Iowa State, Memphis, and West Virginia;

Central - Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma State, TCU, and Texas Tech;

Mountain/Plains - Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas, and Kansas State;

West - BYU, Oregon State, San Diego State; Utah, Washington State.

Even if the ACC gets picked apart by the BIG and the SEC, the Big 12 could add their left overs to remain close behind the big 2. When the GOR ends, then Florida State, Clemson, Virginia and Virginia Tech go to the SEC, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina and Syracuse go to the BIG and Boston College, Duke, Louisville, NC State, Pittsburgh and Wake Forest end up in the Big 12.


MWC - Air Force, Boise State, Colorado State, Fresno State, Hawaii (football only),
Nevada, UNLV, New Mexico, San Jose State, SMU, UTSA, Tulsa, Utah State, Wichita State (olympic sports), and Wyoming...weakening the AAC which would in turn add Middle Tennessee, FIU, Western Kentucky and Lousiana Tech to be third among the G5 Conferences and leaving CUSA to pick up more FCS call ups. (Sam Houston, Tarleton, UCA and Eastern Kentucky).

I dont see the Big12 taking any ACC schools after they take the 4-corners. That said---if the ACC was wounded, I could see grabbing Pitt (I think WVU would love that). Louisville, Miami, or Georgia Tech would then be interesting options as the bookend for Pitt. Louivilles geography would fit well----Miami adds another Florida team---while Georgia Tech gives the league access to another large market and would create a bridge between Pitt/WVU and UCF. However, that really only happens if the Big12 deal after a Big10/SEC raid on the ACC leaves the ACC with a lesser TV deal than the Big12. If the deals are pretty similar---its perhaps more likely WVU amd UCF make the jump to the ACC where the geography would work much better for them. At that point, I could see OSU/WSU (as well as Memphis, SDSU, Louisville, and SMU) getting consideration from the Big12 (standing pat at 12 would be an option as well).

(09-29-2022 01:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-29-2022 08:42 AM)Poster Wrote:  Dennis Dodd's article just yesterday said that Oregon State and Washington State are expected to join the MWC if everybody except them leaves the PAC.

"Industry chatter has Oregon State and Washington State moving to the Mountain West if the Pac-12 collapses. At that point, the MWC would replace the Pac-12 as the largest FBS conference completely located in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones."

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...est-looms/


The idea that Oregon State and Washington State would keep the PAC alive in any form seems to be a fantasy of this board.

Look at the end of the SWC, when there were 4 (not 2) members left and they dissolved the conference rather than rebuilding it in the least. And I think that Houston and possibly TCU were more valuable football brands at that point than either Oregon State or Washington State are today. It's not even 100% clear if the SWC would have been kept alive if the Big 8 had only expanded to 10 teams and the governor and lieutenant governor hadn't forced Texas Tech and Baylor into the conference.

The SWC didnt have 5 years remaining on a 70 million dollar full share payout of the CFP or full ownership of a conference network. There is also a sizable inventory of valuable NCAA basketball credits the conference will get to keep. For instance, just in 2021, the Pac12 earned 19 credits worth 38 million vs the MW that earned 2 credits worth 4 million (and thats just one year----there are 5 past years worth of credits that are still paying value to the conference).

Just a year ago the "experts" and insiders were saying the rest of the Big12 would end up joining the AAC. How'd that work out? The reality is the Pac12 is the better conference shell to work from.
You start with a pair of high ranked P5 academic institutions with a CFP deal (granted--it only lasts a few more years), a gob of NCAA credits, and a TV network. You can scrape off the top 8 from the MW and leave the dead weight. Then perhaps expand into Texas with SMU---UTSA---maybe even Memphis and Navy (football only). Then grab Wichita and Gonzaga as "olympic only" schools and you are good to go with a conference that is about as good as you can build and still be reasonably viable from a geography stand point.

Why are you citing the PAC-12 network as a positive thing? That network is already a notorious joke as it is. Do you even know what channel on your tv the PAC-12 network is on? Yeah, I don't know where the PAC-12 network is on my tv, either. Or if it even is on my TV at all.

The PAC-12 network would actually be a negative of keeping the PAC-12 alive. The conference would have to pay to get rid of the network. (I don't know why the PAC-12 network hasn't already been dissolved.)

(10-01-2022 12:19 AM)Poster Wrote:  

(09-29-2022 01:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-29-2022 08:42 AM)Poster Wrote:  Dennis Dodd's article just yesterday said that Oregon State and Washington State are expected to join the MWC if everybody except them leaves the PAC.

"Industry chatter has Oregon State and Washington State moving to the Mountain West if the Pac-12 collapses. At that point, the MWC would replace the Pac-12 as the largest FBS conference completely located in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones."

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...est-looms/


The idea that Oregon State and Washington State would keep the PAC alive in any form seems to be a fantasy of this board.

Look at the end of the SWC, when there were 4 (not 2) members left and they dissolved the conference rather than rebuilding it in the least. And I think that Houston and possibly TCU were more valuable football brands at that point than either Oregon State or Washington State are today. It's not even 100% clear if the SWC would have been kept alive if the Big 8 had only expanded to 10 teams and the governor and lieutenant governor hadn't forced Texas Tech and Baylor into the conference.

The SWC didnt have 5 years remaining on a 70 million dollar full share payout of the CFP or full ownership of a conference network. There is also a sizable inventory of valuable NCAA basketball credits the conference will get to keep. For instance, just in 2021, the Pac12 earned 19 credits worth 38 million vs the MW that earned 2 credits worth 4 million (and thats just one year----there are 5 past years worth of credits that are still paying value to the conference).

Just a year ago the "experts" and insiders were saying the rest of the Big12 would end up joining the AAC. How'd that work out? The reality is the Pac12 is the better conference shell to work from.
You start with a pair of high ranked P5 academic institutions with a CFP deal (granted--it only lasts a few more years), a gob of NCAA credits, and a TV network. You can scrape off the top 8 from the MW and leave the dead weight. Then perhaps expand into Texas with SMU---UTSA---maybe even Memphis and Navy (football only). Then grab Wichita and Gonzaga as "olympic only" schools and you are good to go with a conference that is about as good as you can build and still be reasonably viable from a geography stand point.

Why are you citing the PAC-12 network as a positive thing? That network is already a notorious joke as it is. Do you even know what channel on your tv the PAC-12 network is on? Yeah, I don't know where the PAC-12 network is on my tv, either. Or if it even is on my TV at all.

The PAC-12 network would actually be a negative of keeping the PAC-12 alive. The conference would have to pay to get rid of the network. (I don't know why the PAC-12 network hasn't already been dissolved.)

Mountain West would just purchase the Pac-12 brand. It has more recognition and marketability. Like Pac-12 After Dark, etc.