(08-04-2022 02:45 PM)Jericho Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 10:29 AM)e-parade Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 10:24 AM)Jericho Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 08:01 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 07:59 PM)Realigned Wrote:  Why do that? You are essentially saying that adding new members doesn’t increase the size of the pie.

They don't. That's the point. You would add them to get into SoCal and Texas.

And what does getting into SoCal and Texas get the PAC? Anything? A toaster?

Recruiting.

You say that word, though I'm not sure it means what you think it means. Is the PAC really hurting for SoCal recruits or Texas recruits as is? If the PAC suddenly had 1/12 of the conference in some other location, is that really going to move the needle? If SMU joins, will PAC Texas (at least for non-SMU schools) recruits jump by 400%? Or will it increase by like 5 people. Total. And for the low, low cost of what's likely millions of dollars per school (as they basically have to now give SMU 1/12 of their pie). I'd like see some realistic projections on this, but I'm guessing the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

I didn't say it would be ALL of their recruiting, but even 5 recruits a year is more than a toaster (obviously a joke on your part).

The Arizona schools have stressed the importance of the Southern California market to them. On ASU's current roster, there are 23 students originally from Southern California (link) Also, recruiting is about more than just athletes - per this article, ASU employs 3 full time recruiters in California, but 2 of them being in SoCal (Orange County and San Diego). Having a football/basketball presence in the area helps with recruiting, even if it is just one game a year.

So I'm not saying they'll gain a bunch of recruits (and students in general) by having a SoCal presence, just that there's a risk of losing it that might not be worth it.