The Pac-12 has been underperforming, much like the ACC was for a decade. They actually have a bunch of capable programs, they've just been hiring dud coaches and flailing away.

(06-15-2018 09:51 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Even with the growth, Boise's market is still small time. The PAC can't lure Texas, Oklahoma or any other Big 12 program. The only real options for them are big Texas universities in big Texas markets. Houston is their best option right now, but they need a partner.

The only other larger Texas universities in large markets are North Texas, UTEP, and UTSA. None of the three currently have similar budget numbers or the recent history of success on the field that Houston does. Of the three named, North Texas is closest in budget, winning, student enrollment, and alumni size. None of the PAC's Texas options, including Houston, have the academics desired by the PAC, and I know at least Houston and North Texas are both Tier 1 research universities. I just don't see the PAC ready to expand with these options. 5 or 10 years down the road, they may feel differently, or have better options.

I know Rice is openly campaigning for a spot in the PAC. They are the only Texas university with the academics the PAC is looking for, but they are a very small private school with a very small alumni base. In the Houston market, U of H just makes more sense.

Source?

(06-15-2018 09:59 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 09:51 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Even with the growth, Boise's market is still small time. The PAC can't lure Texas, Oklahoma or any other Big 12 program. The only real options for them are big Texas universities in big Texas markets. Houston is their best option right now, but they need a partner.

The only other larger Texas universities in large markets are North Texas, UTEP, and UTSA. None of the three currently have similar budget numbers or the recent history of success on the field that Houston does. Of the three named, North Texas is closest in budget, winning, student enrollment, and alumni size. None of the PAC's Texas options, including Houston, have the academics desired by the PAC, and I know at least Houston and North Texas are both Tier 1 research universities. I just don't see the PAC ready to expand with these options. 5 or 10 years down the road, they may feel differently, or have better options.

I know Rice is openly campaigning for a spot in the PAC. They are the only Texas university with the academics the PAC is looking for, but they are a very small private school with a very small alumni base. In the Houston market, U of H just makes more sense.

Source?

My brother is a Rice season ticket holder. His wife works at Rice and in her job she works with the athletic department. Rice wants very badly to move to the PAC. Having said that, the PAC doesn't view Rice as an option right now.

Because of this, I have an idea about what it might take to gain the PAC's interest. I think two large Texas universities with athletic budgets in the neighborhood of $60-$65 million and board approved plans for stadium expansion, would show a real commitment, and be hard for the PAC to pass up, even if the academics are not at the level the PAC would like. Houston is only a few million from reaching the athletic budget number, and has a nice new stadium that I'm sure they can expand. North Texas is still around $20 million away from reaching the athletic budget number, but that could change within the next few years. UNT's athletic department is growing revenue at a very fast rate (more then doubled our athletic budget within the past 8 years). North Texas also has a nice new stadium and plans for expanding it.

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Boise TV market is #112 in the nation. The entire population of Idaho is about the same size as Providence, Rhode Island metro area.

You have no clue about market size at all.

Financial survival for the Big 12 and PAC 12 might truly mean a merger of 14-16 of their best schools. If the Arizona pair are really that unhappy about the situation they need to convince the CA schools its in their best interest. Oregon, Washington, and Colorado could be added to the mix as well and the first two could use their own survival as an excuse to abandon their little brothers. The texlahoma 4 and Kansas would be the Big 12 schools to pursue.

(06-15-2018 09:16 AM)goofus Wrote:  New Western Power Conference (WPC)
USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford
Ore, Wash, Ariz, Col
Tex, Ok, Kan, Neb, Mizzou, Iowa St

This whole thread is pure fantasy, but with that in mind you’ve added 8 PAC schools and 4 BigXII which means this new conference would be paying exit fees to the PAC, BigXII, B1G, and SEC. Add a 9th PAC school and you’ve reached the threshold for dissolution which means no PAC exit fees. So Iowa State or even Missouri would be very disadvantaged compared to a 9th PAC school when choosing member 14.

(06-15-2018 10:12 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Boise TV market is #112 in the nation. The entire population of Idaho is about the same size as Providence, Rhode Island metro area.

You have no clue about market size at all.

I am talking about the northwest, not the whole country. Boise is one of the largest up there. Boise also have a nationwide audience as well because of their win against Oklahoma. That win ranks inside the top 5 upset win in bowl history. Boise have the fans from other schools root for them when they play against their enemies. And, they get the respect that they can beat P5 schools.

(06-15-2018 10:12 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Boise TV market is #112 in the nation. The entire population of Idaho is about the same size as Providence, Rhode Island metro area.

You have no clue about market size at all.

The market is small and the state of Idaho doesn't produce FBS players.

At least with something like Southern Miss they have the tangible of recruiting value.

The Boise State program is right where it belongs at the high G5 level.

(06-15-2018 06:52 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
TCU
Baylor
Texas
Texas Tech
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Colorado
BYU
New Mexico
Arizona
Arizona State

Just get rid of West Virginia.m and you have good southwestern conference of 14 schools.

Kansas and Iowa are not "Southwestern." They're midwestern and don't fit in any Texas-based conference. And with population shifts, Colorado has become more West Coast.

I think a great Southwestern conference would be:
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
TCU
Baylor
Texas
Texas Tech
BYU
New Mexico
Arizona
Arizona State
UNLV
San Diego State
USC
UCLA

The advantage of this is that there is finally a school (USC) with the swagger to step up and say "no" to Texas. (Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas A&M had the fanbase and history but not the swagger). So the conference would finally be stable.

Boise St had an amazing run for a few years and captured the attention of lots of football fans nationwide because everyone loves a great underdog story. As Boise endures coaching changes and isn't consistently 13-0 they will fade from the spotlight

(06-14-2018 11:17 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 11:11 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I actually think the eventual answer is some sort of B12/P12 merger

I've long thought that could be the 16 or 18 team league that could work if it were a Great Midwest/Metro type merger where not everyone gets merged.

Yup. The SWC+Big8 is another example.

(06-15-2018 10:08 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 09:59 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 09:51 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Even with the growth, Boise's market is still small time. The PAC can't lure Texas, Oklahoma or any other Big 12 program. The only real options for them are big Texas universities in big Texas markets. Houston is their best option right now, but they need a partner.

The only other larger Texas universities in large markets are North Texas, UTEP, and UTSA. None of the three currently have similar budget numbers or the recent history of success on the field that Houston does. Of the three named, North Texas is closest in budget, winning, student enrollment, and alumni size. None of the PAC's Texas options, including Houston, have the academics desired by the PAC, and I know at least Houston and North Texas are both Tier 1 research universities. I just don't see the PAC ready to expand with these options. 5 or 10 years down the road, they may feel differently, or have better options.

I know Rice is openly campaigning for a spot in the PAC. They are the only Texas university with the academics the PAC is looking for, but they are a very small private school with a very small alumni base. In the Houston market, U of H just makes more sense.

Source?

My brother is a Rice season ticket holder. His wife works at Rice and in her job she works with the athletic department. Rice wants very badly to move to the PAC. Having said that, the PAC doesn't view Rice as an option right now.

Because of this, I have an idea about what it might take to gain the PAC's interest. I think two large Texas universities with athletic budgets in the neighborhood of $60-$65 million and board approved plans for stadium expansion, would show a real commitment, and be hard for the PAC to pass up, even if the academics are not at the level the PAC would like. Houston is only a few million from reaching the athletic budget number, and has a nice new stadium that I'm sure they can expand. North Texas is still about $25 million away from reaching the athletic budget number, but that could change within the next few years. UNT's athletic department is growing revenue at a very fast rate (more then doubled our athletic budget within the past 8 years). North Texas also has a nice new stadium and plans for expanding it.

TDECU is expandable to 60K. My feeling is that the Pac12 knows they need the Texas market to be competitive in revenue long term. Other than California---their footprint is pretty lightly populated and they have multiple teams in multiple small states. Due to geography, Texas is the only place in the west where the Pac12 can pick enough population to make a difference.

They know all this. They know Houston and another Texas school could adequately work long term (the association would obviously make these added schools even more popular in the state over time). But---thats a fall back position. They want the Longorns. When it comes to UT, the Pac12 is like Ahab and the White Whale. I think they were intending to make one more run at UT in 2023-2024. But....I believe they thought the Pac12 Network would be doing much better than it is by now. If the disparity continues to grow as predicted, they may start second guessing waiting that long. Frankly, I dont think Texas will end up leaving the Big12. The Big12 fits them well and having just 10 members has made B12 membership quite lucrative for Texas (especially when you consider the extra bucks from the LHN--which the Pac12 would never allow).

(06-15-2018 06:57 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 11:30 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Why ASU?

1) They aren't in California. California schools will probably stay put regardless for the academic association.

2) They weren't recently added to the PAC like Utah and Colorado. Neither of those really care about the on the field performance (Colorado especially).

3) Little brother syndrome with the University of Arizona. Pull a TAMU type move and join a bigger FB conference.

Arizona State is the only one I think that could be plucked from the PAC. BYU then becomes a reasonable pairing partner to go to 12. BYU can be a FB only situation.

The California connection is VERY important to Arizona State as an institution. They enroll more California students than most colleges that are actually located in California. They also actually draw in more students from the Midwest (AKA the Big Ten states) than places like Texas, which is why the Big Ten was seriously considering offering ASU a hockey membership. Make no mistake about it: Arizona State looks at itself as a "West Coast" school and WANTS that connection to California specifically (very similar to Colorado previously).

The academic association is also critical for ASU since they are probably the biggest "name brand" institution that has gone all-in on expanding online offerings. The fact that they're in a conference with the likes of Stanford, Berkeley and UCLA is a big-time differentiator between ASU and schools like Grand Canyon University, the University of Phoenix, and Liberty.

Finally, any short-term money advantage that the Big 12 might have over the Pac-12 is completely checked by the fact that the Big 12 is, by FAR, the most unstable P5 conference. Like I've mentioned previously, the Big 12 may not actually ever blow up... but the point is that it's really the only P5 league that even has a *chance* of blowing up.

If the Pac-12 somehow lost both USC and UCLA, it would still be a power conference with prestigious institutions in major markets like San Francisco, Seattle, Denver, etc. If the Big 12 loses Texas and Oklahoma, which was thisclose to occurring at the beginning of this decade, though, then that conference dies as a power league. (It might continue as a zombie like the old Big East/current AAC, but it won't be a power league going forward.)

That's why no one takes any proposal of a P5 school defecting to the Big 12 seriously no matter how much money that league might make. Texas is the conference realignment equivalent of LeBron James - the Cavs might be an NBA Finals team every year that he is there, but if he leaves, that franchise is worthless. Similarly, the Big 12 is worthless if Texas leaves since that essentially guarantees the other 2 schools of any real value, Oklahoma and Kansas, will leave, too. LeBron is the attraction, NOT the Cavs themselves... and in conference realignment terms, Texas is the attraction, NOT the Big 12 overall. Other P5 leagues are built more like the Warriors - they were still an elite group even before they added Kevin Durant and they can survive having Steph Curry be out for the first two rounds of the playoffs. Every other P5 league could lose their two most valuable schools and still survive because they have so much more depth in markets and top tier institutions. The Big 12 doesn't have that at all.

Once again, that doesn't mean that the Big 12 *will* collapse because Texas might continue to be perfectly happy with having the control that it has over the league. We could be sitting here 50 years from now and find that nothing about the Big 12 has changed. However, the overarching issue is that the Big 12 truly is the only P5 league that has any risk of collapse in the first place because its fortunes are tied so much to a single school (Texas) that has already left one conference (the SWC) in this generation and was on the precipice of leaving for the Pac-12 in 2010. 99% of the game is simply being a member of P5 structure, which is guaranteed no matter how much the Pac-12 makes. No P5 university president is putting that at risk when Texas has been proven to get itchy every 15 to 20 years about its conference membership.

(06-15-2018 10:12 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Boise TV market is #112 in the nation. The entire population of Idaho is about the same size as Providence, Rhode Island metro area.

You have no clue about market size at all.

Providence Friars to the PAC 12 confirmed.

(06-15-2018 11:12 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The advantage of this is that there is finally a school (USC) with the swagger to step up and say "no" to Texas. (Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas A&M had the fanbase and history but not the swagger). So the conference would finally be stable.

People keep saying this, while ignoring the evidence, which suggests that the Big 12 is a duopoly, not a monopoly.

E.g., consider the big expansion drama of late 2016, the last really big event that has shaken the Big 12: That was driven almost exclusively by Oklahoma. Texas was happy with the status quo, but Oklahoma made a lot of noise about the Big 12 being left behind by the CFP and in revenue because of having only 10 teams. So the Big 12 went through that process to mollify Oklahoma, despite Texas not wanting to do it. And the process only ended when Oklahoma was convinced that the money wouldn't improve if they added two teams.

Oklahoma has a lot of power in the Big 12 too, they aren't a pushover for Texas. Texas is the 900 pound gorilla, but Oklahoma is their 800 pound brother.

As for the proposed conference you commented on, the actual PAC would be a much stronger hedge against Texas than that motley assembly. Schools like BYU and SDSU are gnats on Texas's radar. But schools like Cal, Stanford, and UCLA? They are all major prestigious schools that can't be pushed around easily by anyone.

Don’t really see both the big 12 and pac 12 dissolve, than rebuild with the top tier since it’s much easier to just merge. Got to believe it’s a Texas group headed to the pac rather than pac schools going to the big 12. Also, not even sure if 2 from byu, Boise, unlv and col state would work as well as arizonia schools for the big 12. Bottom line, if you put Texas and 3 or 5 big 12 schools in the pac 12, they would be $ fine

(06-15-2018 09:59 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 09:51 AM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  I know Rice is openly campaigning for a spot in the PAC. They are the only Texas university with the academics the PAC is looking for, but they are a very small private school with a very small alumni base. In the Houston market, U of H just makes more sense.

Source?

Rice is close to Stanford, with our athletic director and new football coach coming from Palo Alto.

This thread makes me ponder if politics would derail any alignment of Texas and California public schools. Would Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick drop his infatuation with a bathroom bill if that got UH into the PAC?

(06-15-2018 11:12 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 06:52 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
TCU
Baylor
Texas
Texas Tech
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Colorado
BYU
New Mexico
Arizona
Arizona State

Just get rid of West Virginia.m and you have good southwestern conference of 14 schools.

Kansas and Iowa are not "Southwestern." They're midwestern and don't fit in any Texas-based conference.

Kansas is a state that is very directly focused to Texas. Many business and cultural ties to the Dallas area.

(06-15-2018 10:45 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 10:12 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Boise TV market is #112 in the nation. The entire population of Idaho is about the same size as Providence, Rhode Island metro area.

You have no clue about market size at all.

I am talking about the northwest, not the whole country. Boise is one of the largest up there. Boise also have a nationwide audience as well because of their win against Oklahoma. That win ranks inside the top 5 upset win in bowl history. Boise have the fans from other schools root for them when they play against their enemies. And, they get the respect that they can beat P5 schools.

Boise has 670,000 people in the metro according to wikipedia

(06-15-2018 10:45 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 10:12 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(06-15-2018 04:08 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Boise State is not a small market anymore. That town is still growing, and becoming a metro in the state of Idaho. They seemed to be the only one who have been good on tv ratings, football and basketball. Better than the rest of the MWC. PAC 12 might need to stretch out like get Hawaii so that they can reach the east Asia and Australia tv market. Now, the issue with the PAC 12 is that they are stuck in expansion with MWC, big Sky, Big West, WCC, WAC or C-USA schools. They could try and get Houston as well.

Boise TV market is #112 in the nation. The entire population of Idaho is about the same size as Providence, Rhode Island metro area.

You have no clue about market size at all.

I am talking about the northwest, not the whole country. Boise is one of the largest up there. Boise also have a nationwide audience as well because of their win against Oklahoma. That win ranks inside the top 5 upset win in bowl history. Boise have the fans from other schools root for them when they play against their enemies. And, they get the respect that they can beat P5 schools.

Ehh at least for me Boise St's appeal is that they're a giant killer from the group of 5. If Boise St did get in a power conference I would have no interest in watching them unless they were competing for a championship.