https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...expansion/

Quote:The mood floating around Cali's second largest -- but still laidback -- city is split between breathless anticipation and trying not to get too emotionally invested. Dreams have been dashed here before. See: The Chargers following the 2016 season.

"It's not an if, it's a when," said an high-ranking industry source regarding SDSU's future opportunity to join the Pac-12.

"Now that USC and UCLA are gone, there's nobody really to block us," said Jack McGrory, an SDSU alumnus, professor on campus for 25 years and now a member of the California State University board of trustees. "We're the only viable option to have a team in Southern California."

Still, this being realignment, there are never any guarantees.

"Once the ink is dry, so they say, then we celebrate," warned David Malcolm, a real estate tycoon in the area for half a century who helped arrange the $15 million lead donor gift for Snapdragon.

I really can’t imagine PAC expansion not being dilutive, but whatever.


The 11 team conference is an especially odd idea. You have to give one team a bye every week, you can’t have nine conference games and you can’t go back to divisions. (Which the PAC has gotten rid of anyway.) The whole reason why the Big 10 went to 11 was because the 11th team was Penn State, and they hoped the 12th team would be Notre Dame. The current realignment chaos began at least in part because 11 was such an odd number for the Big Ten, and they had come to realize Notre Dame wasn’t joining.

Dodd "filler" article.

(01-26-2023 05:41 PM)Poster Wrote:  I really can’t imagine PAC expansion not being dilutive, but whatever.


The 11 team conference is an especially odd idea. You have to give one team a bye every week, you can’t have nine conference games and you can’t go back to divisions. (Which the PAC has gotten rid of anyway.) The whole reason why the Big 10 went to 11 was because the 11th team was Penn State, and they hoped the 12th team would be Notre Dame. The current realignment chaos began at least in part because 11 was such an odd number for the Big Ten, and they had come to realize Notre Dame wasn’t joining.

The B1G did for years and it was fine. If SDSU is the last ticket to SoCal AND it is determined that SoCal access is necessary for the PAC to survive, then SDSU must be added.

Dilutive is only part of that equation. Much like Houston in the Big 12, there was a need that they singularly could fill AND as a brand they fit within the existing conference framework and history.

(01-26-2023 05:36 PM)Alanda Wrote:  https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...expansion/

Quote:The mood floating around Cali's second largest -- but still laidback -- city is split between breathless anticipation and trying not to get too emotionally invested. Dreams have been dashed here before. See: The Chargers following the 2016 season.

"It's not an if, it's a when," said an high-ranking industry source regarding SDSU's future opportunity to join the Pac-12.

"Now that USC and UCLA are gone, there's nobody really to block us," said Jack McGrory, an SDSU alumnus, professor on campus for 25 years and now a member of the California State University board of trustees. "We're the only viable option to have a team in Southern California."

Still, this being realignment, there are never any guarantees.

"Once the ink is dry, so they say, then we celebrate," warned David Malcolm, a real estate tycoon in the area for half a century who helped arrange the $15 million lead donor gift for Snapdragon.

I don't understand why they don't add SDSU and SMU now. The longer they wait, the more I think the "Pac-12 will die" doomsday people are onto something. The Big 12 only stabilized after adding quality G5 programs.

The Pac-12 should've made a similar move by now. To me, having the San Diego and Dallas markets would help the Pac-12 in media negotiations. Waiting until after the TV deal to sign new members is a bad move, in my opinion.

(01-26-2023 05:59 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 05:36 PM)Alanda Wrote:  https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...expansion/

Quote:The mood floating around Cali's second largest -- but still laidback -- city is split between breathless anticipation and trying not to get too emotionally invested. Dreams have been dashed here before. See: The Chargers following the 2016 season.

"It's not an if, it's a when," said an high-ranking industry source regarding SDSU's future opportunity to join the Pac-12.

"Now that USC and UCLA are gone, there's nobody really to block us," said Jack McGrory, an SDSU alumnus, professor on campus for 25 years and now a member of the California State University board of trustees. "We're the only viable option to have a team in Southern California."

Still, this being realignment, there are never any guarantees.

"Once the ink is dry, so they say, then we celebrate," warned David Malcolm, a real estate tycoon in the area for half a century who helped arrange the $15 million lead donor gift for Snapdragon.

I don't understand why they don't add SDSU and SMU now. The longer they wait, the more I think the "Pac-12 will die" doomsday people are onto something. The Big 12 only stabilized after adding quality G5 programs.

The Pac-12 should've made a similar move by now. To me, having the San Diego and Dallas markets would help the Pac-12 in media negotiations. Waiting until after the TV deal to sign new members is a bad move, in my opinion.

The Big 12 had better options to add, and the Big 12 schools had no backup if the Big 12 completely collapsed. (Like PAC schools now have the Big 12 as a backup.)


And, still, I thought that the Big 12 only should have added two teams last year rather than four.

(01-26-2023 05:55 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 05:41 PM)Poster Wrote:  I really can’t imagine PAC expansion not being dilutive, but whatever.


The 11 team conference is an especially odd idea. You have to give one team a bye every week, you can’t have nine conference games and you can’t go back to divisions. (Which the PAC has gotten rid of anyway.) The whole reason why the Big 10 went to 11 was because the 11th team was Penn State, and they hoped the 12th team would be Notre Dame. The current realignment chaos began at least in part because 11 was such an odd number for the Big Ten, and they had come to realize Notre Dame wasn’t joining.

The B1G did for years and it was fine. If SDSU is the last ticket to SoCal AND it is determined that SoCal access is necessary for the PAC to survive, then SDSU must be added.

Dilutive is only part of that equation. Much like Houston in the Big 12, there was a need that they singularly could fill AND as a brand they fit within the existing conference framework and history.

They won't be dilutive, at least not by much. Bob Thompson hit them at $23m...even with a Pac deal on par with the big 12, that's only about 500k per school. And it's reasonable to expect that they'd increase in value over time, soon becoming additive. The issue for the Pac is that 12th, I still think SMU is the play, but there are several other candidates. With no obvious 2nd candidate, I absolutely could see the Pac just going with 11 for football, then maybe adding Gonzaga to help replace the basketball that was lost and to trumpet as the "12th" in everything but football.

And as far as Houston, I'd say they're similar to SDSU in that they're perhaps not right at the league average, but they're not too far off and they have room to grow. And Houston's Basketball is a huge bonus.

Not sure how a 34,000 seat stadium outside Pullman would fly in the Pac-12.

So how come the P12 hasn't added them yet? They should sit still at ten to help the individual schools' paychecks...

(01-26-2023 06:03 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 05:59 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 05:36 PM)Alanda Wrote:  https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...expansion/

Quote:The mood floating around Cali's second largest -- but still laidback -- city is split between breathless anticipation and trying not to get too emotionally invested. Dreams have been dashed here before. See: The Chargers following the 2016 season.

"It's not an if, it's a when," said an high-ranking industry source regarding SDSU's future opportunity to join the Pac-12.

"Now that USC and UCLA are gone, there's nobody really to block us," said Jack McGrory, an SDSU alumnus, professor on campus for 25 years and now a member of the California State University board of trustees. "We're the only viable option to have a team in Southern California."

Still, this being realignment, there are never any guarantees.

"Once the ink is dry, so they say, then we celebrate," warned David Malcolm, a real estate tycoon in the area for half a century who helped arrange the $15 million lead donor gift for Snapdragon.

I don't understand why they don't add SDSU and SMU now. The longer they wait, the more I think the "Pac-12 will die" doomsday people are onto something. The Big 12 only stabilized after adding quality G5 programs.

The Pac-12 should've made a similar move by now. To me, having the San Diego and Dallas markets would help the Pac-12 in media negotiations. Waiting until after the TV deal to sign new members is a bad move, in my opinion.

The Big 12 had better options to add, and the Big 12 schools had no backup if the Big 12 completely collapsed. (Like PAC schools now have the Big 12 as a backup.)


And, still, I thought that the Big 12 only should have added two teams last year rather than four.

I think that the big 12 probably went into it thinking that they'd add 2, but then they looked at the quality of the candidates and decided that adding 4 would help strengthen the league. And I think that was a smart move for them, after the obvious choice of BYU they had 2 really strong programs in Cincinnati and UCF, and UH was a no-brainer as the 12th (despite the rumors that they almost took Boise instead).

As somebody who has followed (and variously cheered for due to family ties) the athletic programs at urban public universities Cincinnati, Louisville and Memphis for many years, I've always had a soft spot for "public city schools that sponsor football" like Houston, Temple, UAB, Charlotte, Fresno, UTEP, Buffalo, San Diego State, USF, etc.

As such, I would be hugely happy for San Diego State if it received an invite to the Pac 12. On almost every level, the university is qualified to be a member of an all-sports power league — and the Pac makes sense (for both the league and SDSU).

Good luck to Aztec Nation.

(01-26-2023 06:21 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Not sure how a 34,000 seat stadium outside Pullman would fly in the Pac-12.

Well Im pretty sure how much a stadium is filled matters more than the capacity. If they average 30,000 then its good. If they average around 20,000, not so good.

SDSU makes complete sense in the PAC. Solid in both of the revenue sports and fills the gaping hole in southern California.

It's number 12 that is likely creating conflict. The 12th team would definitely be dilutive and the stronger brands are probably only thinking about the short-term. The better brands are probably using expansion as leverage for unequal revenue sharing. If they go to 12...IMO, SMU is the program.

I feel UNLV and SMU are fighting over who will be the 12th and nobody in the Pac 12 can come to a census who it should be.

Why add teams just to add teams. I think you will just dilute your per team TV/bowl/basketball money.

(01-26-2023 05:41 PM)Poster Wrote:  I really can’t imagine PAC expansion not being dilutive, but whatever.


The 11 team conference is an especially odd idea. You have to give one team a bye every week, you can’t have nine conference games and you can’t go back to divisions. (Which the PAC has gotten rid of anyway.) The whole reason why the Big 10 went to 11 was because the 11th team was Penn State, and they hoped the 12th team would be Notre Dame. The current realignment chaos began at least in part because 11 was such an odd number for the Big Ten, and they had come to realize Notre Dame wasn’t joining.

You seem to be skipping over the fact that at the time that the Big Ten expanded to 12, 12 was required to have a CCG.

If prospective media partner say what they will give a PAC-10+1 playing eight conference games is more than 11/12th of what they will give a PAC-10+2 playing nine conference games, then that'd work fine. If the PAC-10+1 gets less than 11/12th of what the PAC-10+2 gets, than add two.

That part isn't really rocket science.

Thing is, the PAC-10 with a full round robin is 45 conference games. A PAC-10+1 stepping down to eight conference games is 44 conference games. A PAC-10+2 at 9 conference games each is 54 conference games. The OOC game values are too uncertain to carry much weight on the contract (which is why the Alliance concept was probably a value-add for 2 out of 3 potential partners), so it seems likely it's between the PAC-10 and the PAC-10+2, depending on whether the inventory is needed to satisfy to media partners with the prospective value of their picks.

Maybe San Diego St’s numbers work out in such a way that they pull their weight financially, but is there a #12 that will as well?

I don’t think SMU, UNLV, or Fresno St do.

Maybe they get a little wild and offer San Diego St a slot and then Hawaii as a fb only. This would lessen the dilutive effect and fb only Hawaii is a lot easier to cut loose, plus it means Hawaii and 8 of the 11 others get to play in week 0.

You know you’re in trouble as a conference when San Diego State is your best option.

Don’t get me wrong, San Diego State is a fine school but all they offer is part of the Southern California market and that’s going to be the only reason they’ll be in the Pac-12 or the Big XII.

How many BCS/NY6 bowl runs have they had? How far have they gone in the NCAAT?

San Diego State is the type of school you add as a complement once you add a better school. We saw that when the Big East invited the Aztecs once they got Boise State on board. When Boise State decided to stay in the MWC, the Big East showed the Aztecs the door. They’re not an Utah, Louisville or UCF type of addition or even a BYU type of addition because they don’t have the fan base nor the legacy of BYU. They’re not Houston, Cincinnati or even SMU since SDSU has never been part of a power conference.

All they have is potential. Or as some people call them, a sleeping giant. But as Matt Brown correctly noted months ago, there’s a reason why sleeping giants never wake up. As a UTEP fan, I’m rooting for them to get invited to the cartel. As a Penn State grad, I question their worthiness in the P5.

There’s not a school out West that’s not in the P5 that’s a home run addition. Maybe that’s why the Pac-12 is not in any rush to add any school at the moment. Probably any numbers given by the tv execs they’ve been talking to don’t really have any impact if the likes of SDSU and SMU are included in any expansion scenario.

(01-26-2023 06:21 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Not sure how a 34,000 seat stadium outside Pullman would fly in the Pac-12.

When Northwestern's renovation is completed, their stadium will hold 35,000.

I believe SDSU's stadium is expandable to 55,000

(01-26-2023 06:27 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 06:03 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 05:59 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(01-26-2023 05:36 PM)Alanda Wrote:  https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...expansion/

Quote:The mood floating around Cali's second largest -- but still laidback -- city is split between breathless anticipation and trying not to get too emotionally invested. Dreams have been dashed here before. See: The Chargers following the 2016 season.

"It's not an if, it's a when," said an high-ranking industry source regarding SDSU's future opportunity to join the Pac-12.

"Now that USC and UCLA are gone, there's nobody really to block us," said Jack McGrory, an SDSU alumnus, professor on campus for 25 years and now a member of the California State University board of trustees. "We're the only viable option to have a team in Southern California."

Still, this being realignment, there are never any guarantees.

"Once the ink is dry, so they say, then we celebrate," warned David Malcolm, a real estate tycoon in the area for half a century who helped arrange the $15 million lead donor gift for Snapdragon.

I don't understand why they don't add SDSU and SMU now. The longer they wait, the more I think the "Pac-12 will die" doomsday people are onto something. The Big 12 only stabilized after adding quality G5 programs.

The Pac-12 should've made a similar move by now. To me, having the San Diego and Dallas markets would help the Pac-12 in media negotiations. Waiting until after the TV deal to sign new members is a bad move, in my opinion.

The Big 12 had better options to add, and the Big 12 schools had no backup if the Big 12 completely collapsed. (Like PAC schools now have the Big 12 as a backup.)


And, still, I thought that the Big 12 only should have added two teams last year rather than four.

I think that the big 12 probably went into it thinking that they'd add 2, but then they looked at the quality of the candidates and decided that adding 4 would help strengthen the league. And I think that was a smart move for them, after the obvious choice of BYU they had 2 really strong programs in Cincinnati and UCF, and UH was a no-brainer as the 12th (despite the rumors that they almost took Boise instead).

I think they wanted to have 12. BYU was obvious. Cincinnati made the playoffs and added a neighbor for WVU. Houston was probably necessary for relevance in Houston. UCF had a couple of NY6 bowls and a new recruiting territory that has been used by WVU, ISU, KU and KSU.