What if Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State had joined the PAC in either 2010 or 2011 like they were supposed to.


Would the PAC have ultimately remained intact?

(01-21-2023 05:07 PM)Poster Wrote:  What if Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State had joined the PAC in either 2010 or 2011 like they were supposed to.


Would the PAC have ultimately remained intact?

No

Some people will probably say that the PAC-16 might have fallen apart anyway because of Larry Scott. But I suspect that Scott’s PAC Network Strategy might have worked out better if Texas and OU had been in the conference. Texas and OU would have made it easier for the PAC network to gain carriage.

And if Scott’s network still failed, I suspect that Texas and OU might have had the influence to fire him earlier than he was fired in real life.

It would have survived and thrived. Pac 16 would have had gotten carriage across Texas,Colorado,Oklahoma and the surrounding plains states

And with CFP berths, even if they were mostly Oklahoma, that would have helped the conference. The conference would have been better at basketball as well.

Ultimately, Texas and Oklahoma left the Big 12 because of recruiting. They were losing top Texas players to the Ohio St.'s, Clemsons, Alabamas, Georgias. Same thing happened at the end of the SWC where top players left the region. If the Pac 16 could have maintained a high profile, then they keep recruiting well and stay. If not, well then they move to the SEC.

The last two years since the announcement, the top Texas players are overwhelmingly staying with Texas, Texas A&M or Oklahoma.

(01-21-2023 05:53 PM)CFBLurker Wrote:  It would have survived and thrived. Pac 16 would have had gotten carriage across Texas,Colorado,Oklahoma and the surrounding plains states

Absolutely agree.

(01-21-2023 07:43 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-21-2023 05:53 PM)CFBLurker Wrote:  It would have survived and thrived. Pac 16 would have had gotten carriage across Texas,Colorado,Oklahoma and the surrounding plains states

Absolutely agree.

This is a no brainer.

The resulting BigXII/MWC + Boise merger would have been:
East:
Baylor-TCU
TTU-UNM
KSU-ISU
AFA
West:
BSU
CSU-WYO
UU-BYU
UNLV-SDSU

(01-21-2023 07:53 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(01-21-2023 07:43 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-21-2023 05:53 PM)CFBLurker Wrote:  It would have survived and thrived. Pac 16 would have had gotten carriage across Texas,Colorado,Oklahoma and the surrounding plains states

Absolutely agree.

This is a no brainer.

The resulting BigXII/MWC + Boise merger would have been:
East:
Baylor-TCU
TTU-UNM
KSU-ISU
AFA
West:
BSU
CSU-WYO
UU-BYU
UNLV-SDSU

I think slightly differently:

XII
To B1G (1): Nebraska
To SEC (2): Missouri, Texas A&M
To PAC (6): Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech
Remaining (3): Baylor, Iowa St, Kansas St

MWC (9): Air Force, BYU, Colorado St, New Mexico, San Diego St, TCU, UNLV, Utah, Wyoming

I think the XII remainders join what became the AAC under the XII banner. Louisville and Rutgers ultimately leave but they do have West Virginia and Connecticut stays. So we have a 16-school AAC. MWC adds Boise St, Fresno St, Hawaii, Nevada, San Jose St, Utah St, and UTEP for 16.

XVI
East: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Connecticut, East Carolina, Memphis, South Florida, Temple, West Virginia
West: Baylor, Houston, Iowa St, Kansas St, Navy, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa

MWC
Mountain: Air Force, BYU, Colorado St, New Mexico, TCU, Utah, UTEP, Wyoming
West: Boise St, Fresno St, Hawaii, Nevada, San Diego St, San Jose St, UNLV, Utah St

The Pac 16 would have been the old Pac 10 + Texas, OU, Tech, OSU, CU, and 1 other. Maybe A&M, maybe someone else, we really wanted the SEC and probably would have used that opportunity to bolt, but if not us then probably Kansas. It would have stayed together and would now be a legitimate rival the B1G and SEC. If A&M had been pushed that direction, or for for whatever reason had chosen to go along, too? The Pac 16 would be a clear #1 right now.

And it all fell apart because Larry Scott was not the right man for the job.

(01-21-2023 09:36 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  The Pac 16 would have been the old Pac 10 + Texas, OU, Tech, OSU, CU, and 1 other. Maybe A&M, maybe someone else, we really wanted the SEC and probably would have used that opportunity to bolt, but if not us then probably Kansas. It would have stayed together and would now be a legitimate rival the B1G and SEC. If A&M had been pushed that direction, or for for whatever reason had chosen to go along, too? The Pac 16 would be a clear #1 right now.

And it all fell apart because Larry Scott was not the right man for the job.

More like the old Pac-8 in one division and the Arizona + Big XII South schools minus Baylor and Colorado in the other division. If A&M still preferred to go to the SEC then the final spot would have gone to either Kansas or Utah.

The reason the Pac-12 invited Colorado first was because they didn’t want Baylor to use the same tricks they used to get in the Big XII in 1994. Only five spots were left which meant Baylor was going to be left behind in a crumbling Big XII. Utah was told by Larry Scott to get ready just in case but he couldn’t guarantee anything at the moment. The moment Boise State was invited to the MWC, it was clear Utah was out of the door in a matter of days. Kansas was in talks with the Big East and Baylor asked TCU if the MWC would take them. June 2010 was an interesting time in realignment.

We all know the rest of the history…..

Here is an alternate reality:

A&M and Louisville end up in the SEC
Nebraska, Maryland, and Missouri in the B1G
UT/OU/TTU/OKST/CU/UU to PAC-16
Big XII survives (ISU, KU, KSU, Baylor) by adding WV, UC, UConn, USF, BYU, Boise, TCU, Houston.

Would look crazy today lol but to answer the original question the PAC-16 is much closer is close to equal to the B1G and SEC in relevance. Big XII is basically a better version of the AAC in the long term. C-USA survives and it and the Sun Belt look much different.

I'd say yes. Even if they lose Oklahoma and Texas then UCLA and USC they have more room to expand. With Tech and Oklahoma State already in the conference I see a SMU and either a Houston add UTSA. San Diego state and Fresno State try to fill the California void. I think a 3 team presence is a much better grip in Texas recruiting than 1 school.

Pac-16 would survive [Tex, Okla, TexT, Colo, Kansas, Utah]
at 16 Pac would have leg up on B-10 & SEC, Tex & Cali recurits stay home
bigger TV contract, more games in 4 timeslot
Tex was giving up LHN, they would have watch every step of PacN being built
weather would have been advantage

B-12 would still be around [Baylor KSU, ISU, OSU]
would have back filled MWC, B-E, C-USA

CU, OU OSU UT TTech plus probably KU. All in all, there was still an opportunity to get them in the 2020's but ultimately the B1G and SEC had long since pulled away and USC fell off. Most of it had to do with demographics, so Larry Scott isn't entirely to blame. It's just unfortunate because OSU and TTech were more of a package deal, whereas you wouldn't have that baggage going from a 14 to 16 team SEC with just OUT and without the lil' bros.

If the PAC was aggressive, they could have added KU and Houston. Or maybe TCU Houston after the PAC 16 fell through. Just to get that footing. But that would have been a super aggressive move, as those programs were still G5. The snobbery cost Cal and Stanford BIGLY.

(01-21-2023 09:35 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(01-21-2023 07:53 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  

(01-21-2023 07:43 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-21-2023 05:53 PM)CFBLurker Wrote:  It would have survived and thrived. Pac 16 would have had gotten carriage across Texas,Colorado,Oklahoma and the surrounding plains states

Absolutely agree.

This is a no brainer.

The resulting BigXII/MWC + Boise merger would have been:
East:
Baylor-TCU
TTU-UNM
KSU-ISU
AFA
West:
BSU
CSU-WYO
UU-BYU
UNLV-SDSU

I think slightly differently:

XII
To B1G (1): Nebraska
To SEC (2): Missouri, Texas A&M
To PAC (6): Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech
Remaining (3): Baylor, Iowa St, Kansas St

MWC (9): Air Force, BYU, Colorado St, New Mexico, San Diego St, TCU, UNLV, Utah, Wyoming

I think the XII remainders join what became the AAC under the XII banner. Louisville and Rutgers ultimately leave but they do have West Virginia and Connecticut stays. So we have a 16-school AAC. MWC adds Boise St, Fresno St, Hawaii, Nevada, San Jose St, Utah St, and UTEP for 16.

XVI
East: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Connecticut, East Carolina, Memphis, South Florida, Temple, West Virginia
West: Baylor, Houston, Iowa St, Kansas St, Navy, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa

MWC
Mountain: Air Force, BYU, Colorado St, New Mexico, TCU, Utah, UTEP, Wyoming
West: Boise St, Fresno St, Hawaii, Nevada, San Diego St, San Jose St, UNLV, Utah St

I think some of the MWC choices are iffy, but otherwise, I think you hit it dead on.

As for the "would it have survived" question, I dunno.

In that scenario, I still don't see USC/UCLA wanting to stay.

And when they leave, I still think Texas might have left, taking OK with it.

But also, in that case, I think Kansas and Colorado start looking for a new home too. Without Utah as a geographical linking state, and the loss of those 4 schools from the PAC, I think they'd want out, and under those circumstances, I think the B10 and even the SEC might be listening.

But with the B12 now a central to east conference, I think the rest of the PAC schools would have less options, and thus would be more likely to stay together.

(01-22-2023 12:35 AM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  Here is an alternate reality:

A&M and Louisville end up in the SEC
Nebraska, Maryland, and Missouri in the B1G
UT/OU/TTU/OKST/CU/UU to PAC-16
Big XII survives (ISU, KU, KSU, Baylor) by adding WV, UC, UConn, USF, BYU, Boise, TCU, Houston.

Would look crazy today lol but to answer the original question the PAC-16 is much closer is close to equal to the B1G and SEC in relevance. Big XII is basically a better version of the AAC in the long term. C-USA survives and it and the Sun Belt look much different.

No need to make 2 major changes, leave the B1G the same as it is today, still A&M and Missouri to the SEC, and the same changes you listed for the Pac 16 and Big XII. The funny thing is that the only long-term changes as far as P5 status in your scenario are for USF, Boise, and UConn. UCF took USF's spot, and Boise and UConn are still hovering around the edges of the P5, too, they could all eventually end up somewhere. Today it looks ok, but back in 2010 that nBig XII would have looked pretty bad.

In a vacuum, maybe.

With the PAC going to 16, I think it would have probably emboldened the Big 10 and SEC to do likewise and I think the pieces they would have gained at the ACC’s expense (before they had time to make that GOR) would have put them ahead of the PAC 16, which would have bred discontent among the Texlahoma 4.