There are a lot of theories on this board regarding the Pac-12 expansion discussion that are not realistic. I will lay it out in a realistic way and give options as to their path forward.
To begin with, the corner four schools will not be going to the Big 12. Unless the B1G expands (at this point unlikely), Arizona and co. and are not going anywhere.
So here are the four likely scenarios:
1. The Pac-12 stands pat at 10.
Expanding does not make sense financially, and the league decides to stand pat. Cal and Stanford scoff at adding Gonzaga.
2. The Pac-12 adds Gonzaga for Olympic sports.
With the CFP expanding to 12, there is no imminent need to expand to 12 to keep up with the Joneses. However, the league is going to drop to the clear #6 power conference in basketball. Replacing UCLA's basketball brand will not be accomplished by one move, but adding Gonzaga is as close as it gets out west. If the money is right, it could be possible. It also allows the league to go back to a 20-game conference schedule to keep up with the other power leagues.
3. The Pac-12 adds SDSU and SMU.
Losing UCLA and USC will hurt recruiting in Southern California. SDSU fills a need. Adding SMU gets the league into the central time zone which could be crucial for television. If both schools take a reduced share and the money works, even if Cal and Stanford hold their noses, the league will add the aforementioned schools. Having 12 also helps give an appearance of stability and increases the odds of having multiple teams in the playoff. To me, no other programs fit the needs of the league as good as these two, and I see no reasonable way the Pac-12 expands to 14.
4. The Pac-12 adds Gonzaga for Olympic sports AND SDSU and SMU.
Best of both worlds if the money is right: SDSU and Gonzaga are both good in basketball giving the league a major boost there. On the football side, the league will avoid the psychological disadvantage of having only 10 schools (something the Big 12 faced for a decade and decided to rectify by expanding to 12 instead of back to 10).
To me, these are the only four realistic scenarios at this point. Which one do you think will happen?
I agree that SDSU and SMU make the most sense, and both get the invite the day after the new deal is signed (coming in at ~ 1/2 shares for the new deal). Gonzaga has many reasons to prefer the Pac over the big 12, and the Pac is more anxious for good news now than the big 12, meaning they'll likely offer Gonzaga a better deal than the big 12 would. Add it all together, and you still get a big dropoff from USCLA, but perhaps not as crushing of a blow as we might have thought a few months ago.
(01-08-2023 05:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: [ -> ]I agree that SDSU and SMU make the most sense, and both get the invite the day after the new deal is signed (coming in at ~ 1/2 shares for the new deal). Gonzaga has many reasons to prefer the Pac over the big 12, and the Pac is more anxious for good news now than the big 12, meaning they'll likely offer Gonzaga a better deal than the big 12 would. Add it all together, and you still get a big dropoff from USCLA, but perhaps not as crushing of a blow as we might have thought a few months ago.
Right, these three would be about as good as is gets with regards to expanding. I think SDSU and SMU are headed the Pac-12; I'm still up in the air as to whether the Pac-12 will take the plunge on Gonzaga.
10 is the way to go.
Most of this league has a foot out the door. Reloading simplify complicates their exits.
Putting Gonzaga first is just laughable. If the PAC expands, SDSU will be their first choice. Gonzaga would have to be paired with Hawaii or Air Force to get a look.
The PAC can't "stand pat." If they don't add SDSU they lose the SD market which they already claim via USC and UCLA. Standing Pat at 10 means they lose that market and gift it to the B12 which will take SDSU in a New York minute, likely Fresno as well.
(01-08-2023 06:36 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote: [ -> ]Putting Gonzaga first is just laughable. If the PAC expands, SDSU will be their first choice. Gonzaga would have to be paired with Hawaii or Air Force to get a look.
The PAC can't "stand pat." If they don't add SDSU they lose the SD market which they already claim via USC and UCLA. Standing Pat at 10 means they lose that market and gift it to the B12 which will take SDSU in a New York minute, likely Fresno as well.
The options are not in order of likelihood.
(01-08-2023 06:36 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote: [ -> ]Putting Gonzaga first is just laughable. If the PAC expands, SDSU will be their first choice. Gonzaga would have to be paired with Hawaii or Air Force to get a look.
The PAC can't "stand pat." If they don't add SDSU they lose the SD market which they already claim via USC and UCLA. Standing Pat at 10 means they lose that market and gift it to the B12 which will take SDSU in a New York minute, likely Fresno as well.
Also, the Big 12 is not adding a G5 program. They will not get pro-rata money for that. They will wait seven or so years when the B1G expands with Oregon and Washington to grab the remaining Pac-12 schools.
(01-08-2023 06:42 PM)shizzle787 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2023 06:36 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote: [ -> ]Putting Gonzaga first is just laughable. If the PAC expands, SDSU will be their first choice. Gonzaga would have to be paired with Hawaii or Air Force to get a look.
The PAC can't "stand pat." If they don't add SDSU they lose the SD market which they already claim via USC and UCLA. Standing Pat at 10 means they lose that market and gift it to the B12 which will take SDSU in a New York minute, likely Fresno as well.
Also, the Big 12 is not adding a G5 program. They will not get pro-rata money for that. They will wait seven or so years when the B1G expands with Oregon and Washington to grab the remaining Pac-12 schools.
The B12 just added 4 G5 schools for God's sake. And they did that before the BIG gutted the PAC in Southern California when they took USC and UCLA. That changed things big time.
I see the B12 honks on here thinking they are going to poach the PAC because the PAC is more vulnerable because it has schools that may interest the BIG that the B12 doesn't have. Terrible logic. Funny, when the B12 got poached everyone predicted that the conference would get raided and fold as well. Well, that didn't happen and you reloaded with four G5 programs and now you claim to be better. Sure. Then PAC will likely add just two to take care of the two schools they just lost.
The PAC remains together likely though the end of the decade and they will add at least SDSU to stop the bleeding by 2024.
I think the most likely scenario is the PAC offers Tulane and offers Houston the support for AAU membership to join them. Tulane is AAU already.
(01-08-2023 07:00 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2023 06:42 PM)shizzle787 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2023 06:36 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote: [ -> ]Putting Gonzaga first is just laughable. If the PAC expands, SDSU will be their first choice. Gonzaga would have to be paired with Hawaii or Air Force to get a look.
The PAC can't "stand pat." If they don't add SDSU they lose the SD market which they already claim via USC and UCLA. Standing Pat at 10 means they lose that market and gift it to the B12 which will take SDSU in a New York minute, likely Fresno as well.
Also, the Big 12 is not adding a G5 program. They will not get pro-rata money for that. They will wait seven or so years when the B1G expands with Oregon and Washington to grab the remaining Pac-12 schools.
The B12 just added 4 G5 schools for God's sake. And they did that before the BIG gutted the PAC in Southern California when they took USC and UCLA. That changed things big time.
I see the B12 honks on here thinking they are going to poach the PAC because the PAC is more vulnerable because it has schools that may interest the BIG that the B12 doesn't have. Terrible logic. Funny, when the B12 got poached everyone predicted that the conference would get raided and fold as well. Well, that didn't happen and you reloaded with four G5 programs and now you claim to be better. Sure. Then PAC will likely add just two to take care of the two schools they just lost.
The PAC remains together likely though the end of the decade and they will add at least SDSU to stop the bleeding by 2024.
Because they were desperate. They are no longer desperate.
I hear SDSU is a near lock. If the Pac signs a deal it means everyone has already signed a GOR. Then adding SDSU sounds like a money maker for their TV partner and thus for the 10. No reason not to add.
SMU is likely dilutive, but for the right fractional share may not be. Only question is whether SMU would jump. In 6 years (after the big players leap) it could be the start of a "southwest" wing for other academic-focused FBS teams.
(01-08-2023 07:08 PM)Sactowndog Wrote: [ -> ]I think the most likely scenario is the PAC offers Tulane and offers Houston the support for AAU membership to join them. Tulane is AAU already.
Smart post. However, I think the pac12 will need to make a run at at least two existing big12 schools with a similar enticement to make Houston consider.
Which is a nearly impossible task, due to massive big12 exit fees, although Houston would not be fully subject to it.
The pac will needs to sign a 5-7 GOR and media value will need to be higher than big12s.
(01-08-2023 06:36 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote: [ -> ]Standing Pat at 10 means they lose that market and gift it to the B12 which will take SDSU in a New York minute, likely Fresno as well.
B12 could have taken SDSU anytime they wanted over the past 20 years and haven't. I know the dynamics of the area have changed with ucla and usc leaving for the B10, but to act like the B12 is just hoping that the Pac12 doesn't take SDSU so they can snatch them up I don't think it's reality. If the PAC decides to not expand, SDSU may be stuck in the MWC for the foreseeable future.
I've read/watched/listened to the punditry regurgitate this, but sorry, no -
The PAC isn't adding SMU - or anyone else east of the rockies - unless they are part of a group of schools, ie. a whole division.
And that would likely involve a B12 raid. Which, I think, at this point is unlikely.
(01-08-2023 10:02 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ]I've read/watched/listened to the punditry regurgitate this, but sorry, no -
The PAC isn't adding SMU - or anyone else east of the rockies - unless they are part of a group of schools, ie. a whole division.
And that would likely involve a B12 raid. Which, I think, at this point is unlikely.
You should be in LA witnessing who is meeting whom right now….
(01-08-2023 10:04 PM)Pony94 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2023 10:02 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ]I've read/watched/listened to the punditry regurgitate this, but sorry, no -
The PAC isn't adding SMU - or anyone else east of the rockies - unless they are part of a group of schools, ie. a whole division.
And that would likely involve a B12 raid. Which, I think, at this point is unlikely.
You should be in LA witnessing who is meeting whom right now….
Do tell…. Please
(01-08-2023 10:04 PM)Pony94 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2023 10:02 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ]I've read/watched/listened to the punditry regurgitate this, but sorry, no -
The PAC isn't adding SMU - or anyone else east of the rockies - unless they are part of a group of schools, ie. a whole division.
And that would likely involve a B12 raid. Which, I think, at this point is unlikely.
You should be in LA witnessing who is meeting whom right now….
Hey, if they are, good on them (and who knows, maybe they'll bring AAU Rice along).
But I think we all know what courtesy meetings are...
I voted for SDSU, SMU, and Gonzaga. But I think the SMU invite will be for "football only." The Pac-12 needs Gonzaga for basketball and Olympic sports, to help replace UCLA. They need SMU for football. In basketball, Gonzaga has a net ranking of 12, SDSU has a net ranking of 23 and SMU has a net ranking of 204. SMU will help in football, but not much for the Olympic sports and they add to the travel for Olympic sports.
(01-08-2023 10:20 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ]I voted for SDSU, SMU, and Gonzaga. But I think the SMU invite will be for "football only." The Pac-12 needs Gonzaga for basketball and Olympic sports, to help replace UCLA. They need SMU for football. In basketball, Gonzaga has a net ranking of 12, SDSU has a net ranking of 23 and SMU has a net ranking of 204. SMU will help in football, but not much for the Olympic sports and they add to the travel for Olympic sports.
So WAC for our other sports?