Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
PAC Expansion Strategy
Author Message
joeben69 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 288
Joined: Nov 2017
Reputation: 7
I Root For: sdsu, ucsd, usd
Location:
Post: #21
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-04-2019 05:00 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The Big 12 schools are looking eastward, not west. PAC 12's only expansion options are Big Sky, MWC, UTEP, UTSA, and Houston. They are in a bind. UC-Davis does fit the PAC 12's academic profile. But, they are not strong yet. Boise State seems to be a rival to the PAC's Washington and Oregon schools for a while. Since the Idaho state's politicians strip the flagship status from Idaho, Boise State right now is being called Idaho's flagship university.

Based on this notion of academics and athletic potential then there are other more appropriate expansion candidates that are G5 than UTEP & UTSA...There are 5 MWC institutions that are listed as R1...These MWC universities fit the academic profile for PAC-12 candidates...

Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education
Mountain West Conference Universities classified as
"R1: Doctoral Universities – Highest Research Activity"
Colorado State University
University of Hawaii at Manoa
University of New Mexico
University of Nevada-Las Vegas
University of Nevada-Reno

List of Research Universities in the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_re...ted_States

Going with your original assumption of academic school from TX for PAC-12 candidates then it would be better to go with...
University of Houston (AAC)
University of North Texas (CUSA)
...both are classified as R1...UNT would replace UTEP & UTSA as suggested potential PAC-12 candidates...both are G5 universities and you don't need to dip down into the D1 FCS ranks...
01-04-2019 06:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MinerInWisconsin Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,765
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 228
I Root For: UTEP, of course
Location: The Frozen Tundra
Post: #22
RE: PAC Expatnsion Strategy
Houston would be a good target for the PAC12. Lots of great recruits and lots of eyeballs plus tons of money.
01-04-2019 06:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,395
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 145
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #23
PAC Expansion Strategy
Lots of holes here, culturally the Midwest schools have a totally different culture than the West Coast. This and too many mouths to feed does not make a B12 connection possible and/or viable,

The PAC needs to stay West. Boise and Fresno or Hawaii could be added as football only, UNLV and Nevad added as full time to get to 16. Any more than 16 makes a league very difficult to manage.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
01-04-2019 09:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DoubleRSU Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 528
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation: 28
I Root For: SU, WAC, NAU
Location:
Post: #24
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
Texas isn’t joining a loser conference in the Pac12. Big12 is better than Pac12
01-04-2019 09:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 26,980
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1145
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #25
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-04-2019 09:14 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Lots of holes here, culturally the Midwest schools have a totally different culture than the West Coast. This and too many mouths to feed does not make a B12 connection possible and/or viable,

The PAC needs to stay West. Boise and Fresno or Hawaii could be added as football only, UNLV and Nevad added as full time to get to 16. Any more than 16 makes a league very difficult to manage.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The thing is---if the Pac12 is going to expand with G5's--they are far better off getting into new western states with large population that might serve to drive subscriber increases for the Pac-12 Network. Add two G5's in Texas and the Pac12 gains access a state with the second largest population in the nation (only behind California). There's lots of TV's and high school football players in Texas. Going into Idaho, Hawaii. and Nevada---all ultra low population states---and adding yet another California school----really doesnt add to the Pac-12 Network subscriber base in any meaningful way.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2019 12:14 AM by Attackcoog.)
01-04-2019 11:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,390
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1275
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #26
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-04-2019 01:18 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 01:08 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Without Texas, expansion into the central time zone is not justified. A school needs to bring significantly more revenue than just themselves. OU probably does as well, even though the P12 would have to lower standards and take oSu as well. This assuming OU does not jump to the B1G or SEC, which are far more lucrative and easier travel - meaning if they are going to leave the B12 why would they choose the poor man's option over the rich man's?

KU/OU combined to me have the impact of a Texas.

They definitely boost PAC basketball which is struggling.

OU is usually better than Texas, one of the best FB brands around.

I don't think Okie State and K-State need to be packaged along politically either when they will still be with Texas in a P5 conference. A P5 with plenty of depth to withstand the losses in FB and BB.

Texas can then make a push for bringing in UH to further regionalize the XII for travel. Go to 12 with UH, UM, UC, UCF that will make up for the losses.

07-coffee3

It's kind of a Dean Wormer moment, (Arrogant, broke and losing is no way to approach realignment!) Who knew Larry Scott was an Ivy educated Kent Dorfman!
01-04-2019 11:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sellular1 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,606
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 94
I Root For: USF
Location: The ATL
Post: #27
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-04-2019 11:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 01:18 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 01:08 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Without Texas, expansion into the central time zone is not justified. A school needs to bring significantly more revenue than just themselves. OU probably does as well, even though the P12 would have to lower standards and take oSu as well. This assuming OU does not jump to the B1G or SEC, which are far more lucrative and easier travel - meaning if they are going to leave the B12 why would they choose the poor man's option over the rich man's?

KU/OU combined to me have the impact of a Texas.

They definitely boost PAC basketball which is struggling.

OU is usually better than Texas, one of the best FB brands around.

I don't think Okie State and K-State need to be packaged along politically either when they will still be with Texas in a P5 conference. A P5 with plenty of depth to withstand the losses in FB and BB.

Texas can then make a push for bringing in UH to further regionalize the XII for travel. Go to 12 with UH, UM, UC, UCF that will make up for the losses.

07-coffee3

It's kind of a Dean Wormer moment, (Arrogant, broke and losing is no way to approach realignment!) Who knew Larry Scott was an Ivy educated Kent Dorfman!

03-lmfao See if you can guess what I am now.
01-05-2019 12:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,308
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #28
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-04-2019 06:36 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  Based on this notion of academics and athletic potential ...

Except it is common to get academics wrong. Academics are a hurdle, they are not a draw. There has to be some value to justify adding the school, and then list can be whittled down if the more snobbish schools in a conference think associating with some schools on the list is academic slumming. And obviously the level of the hurdle depends on the individual conferences and the clout of their most academically snobbish clique.

Academic status might get a school on some pro forma search list, but if the brand value of the teams don't do it, that's not a driving force.

Look at Rutgers ... Rutgers was available to the Big Ten forever, but it wasn't until they were looking for a school to even up the Maryland add that they go serious consideration, and it seems likely it was cable revenues in the New Jersey parts of the Greater NY area that put them over the top even as a "make up the numbers" add.

Texas is #40 in worldwide ranking in the Shanghai list, #27 in the US, #7 in Computer Science, #20 in Math, #26 in Chemistry, #34 in Physics, #36 in Economics. The only conference in the country that might turn up their nose at Texas's academics plays FCS football, not FBS.

But they are perennially among the biggest spenders in college sports in the country and even after a long spell of mediocrity, they have big brand value in Football, and that is the draw. The academics just mean that no snobbish schools in any A5 conference would ever start to invent objections to having Texas in the conference.

Oklahoma has a big Football brand, but they are alongside OkSU in the 401-500 tier in the Shanghai list, which equates to 118-139 in the US. It'd be a hard sell to get OU into the Big Ten on the academic hurdle, but not for the SEC, which does not have the same size or influence of a clique perpetuating pointless academic snobbery.

I expect the PAC-12 is somewhere in between the SEC and the Big Ten in terms of how badly plagued it is by pointless academic snobbery ... but trying to get OkSU (Go Pokes!) and Kansas State in as part of a package deal might still be a tough sell.
01-05-2019 12:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,390
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1275
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #29
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-05-2019 12:35 AM)Sellular1 Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 11:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 01:18 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 01:08 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Without Texas, expansion into the central time zone is not justified. A school needs to bring significantly more revenue than just themselves. OU probably does as well, even though the P12 would have to lower standards and take oSu as well. This assuming OU does not jump to the B1G or SEC, which are far more lucrative and easier travel - meaning if they are going to leave the B12 why would they choose the poor man's option over the rich man's?

KU/OU combined to me have the impact of a Texas.

They definitely boost PAC basketball which is struggling.

OU is usually better than Texas, one of the best FB brands around.

I don't think Okie State and K-State need to be packaged along politically either when they will still be with Texas in a P5 conference. A P5 with plenty of depth to withstand the losses in FB and BB.

Texas can then make a push for bringing in UH to further regionalize the XII for travel. Go to 12 with UH, UM, UC, UCF that will make up for the losses.

07-coffee3

It's kind of a Dean Wormer moment, (Arrogant, broke and losing is no way to approach realignment!) Who knew Larry Scott was an Ivy educated Kent Dorfman!

03-lmfao See if you can guess what I am now.

You didn't throw up in front of Dean Wormer. You threw up on Dean Wormer!

I still love that movie. I was in an animal house type of fraternity. We didn't toga, but we had brand new galvanized garbage cans filled with Hunch Punch (180 proof grain alcohol and loads of Hawaiian Punch and cut up fresh citrus). My roommate actually had to go through the "Thank you sir may I have another routine at his house. And all of this was well before the movie came out. I almost split my sides laughing at that movie. We even had stupid pledge names. My favorites were so non PC. We had twins whose pledge names were Heebie and Jeebie. Brothers who could tell them apart didn't have to sign their pledge books. I can tell you one thing for sure, you didn't bring a serious date to the parties.
(This post was last modified: 01-05-2019 01:48 AM by JRsec.)
01-05-2019 01:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,658
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 55
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #30
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
The PAC 12's only real hope is make whatever consolations that it takes to get Texas. Oklahoma and Texas would probably both prefer an Eastward move to a westward one.

If Oklahoma chooses to go to the Big Ten or SEC as the PAC 12 I would offer all 4 Texas schools so that the Longhorns can have all of their friends.
01-05-2019 12:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,614
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 418
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #31
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
The PAC has no realistic path to expansion, period. Nobody they would want wants them. Even in a P4 scenario they would still be at 12 schools.
01-05-2019 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,395
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 145
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #32
PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-05-2019 01:37 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-05-2019 12:35 AM)Sellular1 Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 11:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 01:18 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 01:08 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Without Texas, expansion into the central time zone is not justified. A school needs to bring significantly more revenue than just themselves. OU probably does as well, even though the P12 would have to lower standards and take oSu as well. This assuming OU does not jump to the B1G or SEC, which are far more lucrative and easier travel - meaning if they are going to leave the B12 why would they choose the poor man's option over the rich man's?

KU/OU combined to me have the impact of a Texas.

They definitely boost PAC basketball which is struggling.

OU is usually better than Texas, one of the best FB brands around.

I don't think Okie State and K-State need to be packaged along politically either when they will still be with Texas in a P5 conference. A P5 with plenty of depth to withstand the losses in FB and BB.

Texas can then make a push for bringing in UH to further regionalize the XII for travel. Go to 12 with UH, UM, UC, UCF that will make up for the losses.

07-coffee3

It's kind of a Dean Wormer moment, (Arrogant, broke and losing is no way to approach realignment!) Who knew Larry Scott was an Ivy educated Kent Dorfman!

03-lmfao See if you can guess what I am now.

You didn't throw up in front of Dean Wormer. You threw up on Dean Wormer!

I still love that movie. I was in an animal house type of fraternity. We didn't toga, but we had brand new galvanized garbage cans filled with Hunch Punch (180 proof grain alcohol and loads of Hawaiian Punch and cut up fresh citrus). My roommate actually had to go through the "Thank you sir may I have another routine at his house. And all of this was well before the movie came out. I almost split my sides laughing at that movie. We even had stupid pledge names. My favorites were so non PC. We had twins whose pledge names were Heebie and Jeebie. Brothers who could tell them apart didn't have to sign their pledge books. I can tell you one thing for sure, you didn't bring a serious date to the parties.


Similar experiences as TKE. Crazy times, wonder how we somehow survived and finally grew up. We had a guy that slurped jello like Belushi, long before Belushi.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
01-05-2019 03:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
solohawks Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,523
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 305
I Root For: UNCW
Location: Wilmington, NC
Post: #33
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-04-2019 12:43 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 12:39 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Interesting you think Texas wants to go west

After the PAC-16 debacle a few years ago, it seemed pretty clear Texas did not want to go West. The PAC did error big time when it rejected the Oklahoma pair to get to 14 after the 16-school plan failed.

I always thought that was incredibly dumb too

They would have had half of their original PAC 16 targets and it would have set it up nicley to add Texas down the road
01-05-2019 03:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,333
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 136
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #34
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
The way Boise State jumped quickly to R2 shows that they are getting the funds, but Idaho are staying the same. In a couple of years, Boise State could be R1. Boise State might be a possible PAC 12 candidate in a few years since they do sometimes get more viewers watching them than some others in the MWC.
01-05-2019 04:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,308
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #35
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-05-2019 03:37 PM)solohawks Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 12:43 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(01-04-2019 12:39 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Interesting you think Texas wants to go west

After the PAC-16 debacle a few years ago, it seemed pretty clear Texas did not want to go West. The PAC did error big time when it rejected the Oklahoma pair to get to 14 after the 16-school plan failed.

I always thought that was incredibly dumb too

They would have had half of their original PAC 16 targets and it would have set it up nicley to add Texas down the road

If the PAC-12 was a corporation playing Conference Realignment Risk, they would have taken that.

But a conference is a club of schools, and not enough schools in the club wanted OU & Oklahoma State.

(Go Pokes!)

If the combination of OU and Oklahoma State wasn't wanted, then combinations that include those could be upgraded from the PAC-12's perspective by leaving those two out.

So per the OP, that leaves, (1) Offer 4 Texas Schools, (2) Go with 2 Texas Schools and (3) Expand with Kansas and use them as a bargaining chip.

(1) There are no four Texas Schools leaving out Texas and Texas A&M that is a worthwhile add, and Texas doesn't want to join the PAC and a school does not leave the SEC.

(2) There are no 2 Texas schools leaving out Texas and Texas A&M that are better than Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, so that's out.

That leaves (3), add Kansas, but that needs a second, and Kansas plus Kansas State is not better than Oklahoma & Oklahoma State.

(3a) Kansas + Oklahoma is probably not on offer unless the Big12 is again under threat of collapse, but if Texas and Oklahoma are still in the Big12, it's not under serious threat, so that is a post-Texas-bolts scenario.

(3b) Kansas + a Texas School? Which of TTech, TCU, Baylor are appreciably better than Oklahoma State? Inarguably Kansas + a Go5 Texas school is not.

(3c) Kansas + some other Big12 School? Already run through Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, TCU, TTech and Baylor, that leaves Iowa State and WVU, neither in any appreciable way superior to Kansas+Kansas State which, again, is not superior to Oklahoma + Oklahoma State which was already passed on.
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2019 12:44 AM by BruceMcF.)
01-05-2019 09:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,903
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 119
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #36
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-05-2019 04:28 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The way Boise State jumped quickly to R2 shows that they are getting the funds, but Idaho are staying the same. In a couple of years, Boise State could be R1. Boise State might be a possible PAC 12 candidate in a few years since they do sometimes get more viewers watching them than some others in the MWC.

This is one I agree with you on.

Academics can always be fixed with enough money. Louisville is an example of a university that changed its profile through fundraising and got the invite from the ACC.

WVU for those in the east was last resort university for years and even its profile has moved up with a 566 billion dollar endowment. It will never be confused with Georgia Tech or another top tier public school but with enough money it was deemed "acceptable" for the XII.
01-06-2019 12:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,007
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 112
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #37
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-06-2019 12:14 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(01-05-2019 04:28 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The way Boise State jumped quickly to R2 shows that they are getting the funds, but Idaho are staying the same. In a couple of years, Boise State could be R1. Boise State might be a possible PAC 12 candidate in a few years since they do sometimes get more viewers watching them than some others in the MWC.

This is one I agree with you on.

Academics can always be fixed with enough money. Louisville is an example of a university that changed its profile through fundraising and got the invite from the ACC.

WVU for those in the east was last resort university for years and even its profile has moved up with a 566 billion dollar endowment. It will never be confused with Georgia Tech or another top tier public school but with enough money it was deemed "acceptable" for the XII.

It would take a whole lot more money than you realize for Boise State or UNLV to "fix" their research problem. Graduation rates are another issue for these two schools as well. (The ACC definitely has a case of indigestion and heartburn from Louisville).

Even Houston is not close to Pac-12 level (although the much lower B12 level is reachable). They would have to double their research spending (and extra $150M per year) just to be the bottom school in the Pac-12; or put another way $1B extra over 6 years to be even with WSU. It's a little easier to spend $5M on coaches.

The Pac-12 is not too far from B1G in what it's Presidents and Chancellors will sign off on. To be invited you need the California schools and Washington to agree that the school is acceptable. Like the SEC and B1G, recent additions have been flagships and AAU members or close. (R1 ranges from Memphis and FIU to Harvard and Cal; so that alone is not telling). A good rule of thumb would be a combined $400 million in research and athletic budgets, with research at least double, and preferably more than triple athletics budgets.

Below a real comparison, by the numbers. You can see how much higher the standards are on the research side than the B12 or ACC.

Some Pac-12 schools:

Washington
Research: $1,180,563,000
Athletics: $123,503,513

UCLA
Research: $1,021,227,000
Athletics: $104,106,646

Cal
Research: $788,505,000
Athletics: $ 90,976,576
// has another $16M/year in stadium debt service Chancellor has decided to eat this for now

Washington State
Research: $333,134,000
Athletics: $ 71,801,820

Colorado
Research: $420,775,000
Athletics: $ 90,640,627

Arizona
Research: $606,219,000
Athletics: $ 91,756,963

Utah
Research: $518,928,000
Athletics: $ 81,620,307


B12 School (we are looking at, they are also the top along with Iowa State)
Texas
Research: $650,608,000
Athletics: $207,022,323

Oklahoma
Research: $253,344,000
Athletics: $132,910,780

Kansas
Research: $311,383,000
Athletics: $ 94,709,233


Some G5 for Comparison

Boise State (R2 School)
Research: $ 31,341,000
Athletics: $ 45,456,789

Houston
Research: $150,628,000
Athletics: $ 55,277,308

Colorado State
Research: $317,219,000
Athletics: $ 43,965,622

UNLV
Research: $ 42,000,000
Athletics: $ 47,476,606

San Diego State (R2 school)
Research: $ 93,572,000
Athletics: $ 51,569,852

// below for fun

Idaho (FCS)
Research: $ 97,493,000
Athletics: $ 22,817,285

UC Davis (FCS)
Research: $721,077,000
Athletics: $ 34,625,583

UC San Diego (no football; note they are ramping up to around $17M for Big West; were $8.9M 2 years ago)
Research: $1,101,466,000
Athletics: $ 12,535,867

There really isn't a school beyond the three B12 I listed, that checks the boxes for academic stature, athletic credibility and market. No G5 schools checks all those boxes off, or even two of them. And we can rule out both Texas and Oklahoma from consideration, given the economic disparity between the Pac-12 and it's rivals the B1G and SEC. No doubt many of the little 8 would come running, each asking for a life boat from the Pac-12. Only an orphaned Kansas with no offer from the B1G or SEC strikes me as intriguing -- especially if division-less football is adopted (so you can have an odd number like 13 or 15).
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2019 03:02 PM by Stugray2.)
01-06-2019 04:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,308
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 128
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #38
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-06-2019 04:23 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  ... No doubt many of the little 8 would come running, each asking for a life boat from the Pac-12. Only an orphaned Kansas with no offer from the B1G or SEC strikes me as intriguing -- especially if division-less football is adopted (so you can have an odd number like 13 or 15).

Yes, divisionless football addresses the hangup with Kansas + ??? that I discussed above:
(01-05-2019 09:42 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  That leaves (3), add Kansas, but that needs a second, and Kansas plus Kansas State is not better than Oklahoma & Oklahoma State.
01-06-2019 06:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,140
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 183
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #39
RE: PAC Expansion Strategy
(01-06-2019 04:23 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  It would take a whole lot more money than you realize for Boise State or UNLV to "fix" their research problem. Graduation rates are another issue for these two schools as well. (The ACC definitely has a case of indigestion and heartburn from Louisville).

Even Houston is not close to Pac-12 level (although the much lower B12 level is reachable). They would have to double their research spending (and extra $150M per year) just to be the bottom school in the Pac-12; or put another way $1B extra over 6 years to be even with WSU. It's a little easier to spend $5M on coaches.

The Pac-12 is not too far from B1G in what it's Presidents and Chancellors will sign off on. To be invited you need the California schools and Washington to agree that the school is acceptable. Like the SEC and B1G, recent additions have beenflagships and AAU members or close. (R1 ranges from Memphis and FIU to Harvard and Cal; so that alone is not telling). A good rule of thumb would be a combined $400 million in research and athletic budgets, with research at least double, and preferably more than triple athletics budgets.

Below a real comparison, by the numbers. You can see how much higher the standards are on the reserach side than the B12 or ACC.

Some Pac-12 schools:

Washington
Research: $1,180,563,000
Athletics: $123,503,513

UCLA
Research: $1,021,227,000
Athletics: $104,106,646

Cal
Research: $788,505,000
Athletics: $ 90,976,576
// has another $16M/year in stadium debt service Chancellor has decided to eat this for now

Washington State
Research: $333,134,000
Athletics: $ 71,801,820

Colorado
Research: $420,775,000
Athletics: $ 90,640,627

Arizona
Research: $606,219,000
Athletics: $ 91,756,963

Utah
Research: $518,928,000
Athletics: $ 81,620,307


B12 School (we are looking at, they are also the top along with Iowa State)
Texas
Research: $650,608,000
Athletics: $207,022,323

Oklahoma
Research: $253,344,000
Athletics: $132,910,780

Kansas
Research: $311,383,000
Athletics: $ 94,709,233


Some G5 for Comparison

Boise State (R2 School)
Research: $ 31,341,000
Athletics: $ 45,456,789

Houston
Research: $150,628,000
Athletics: $ 55,277,308

Colorado State
Research: $317,219,000
Athletics: $ 43,965,622

UNLV
Research: $ 42,000,000
Athletics: $ 47,476,606

San Diego State (R2 school)
Research: $ 93,572,000
Athletics: $ 51,569,852

// below for fun

Idaho (FCS)
Research: $ 97,493,000
Athletics: $ 22,817,285

UC Davis (FCS)
Research: $721,077,000
Athletics: $ 34,625,583

UC San Diego (no football; note they are ramping up to around $17M for Big West; were $8.9M 2 years ago)
Research: $1,101,466,000
Athletics: $ 12,535,867

There really isn't a school beyond the three B12 I listed, that checks the boxes for academic stature, athletic credibility and market. No G5 schools checks all those boxes off, or even two of them. And we can rule out both Texas and Oklahoma from consideration, given the economic disparity between the Pac-12 and it's rivals the B1G and SEC. No doubt many of the little 8 would come running, each asking for a life boat from the Pac-12. Only an orphaned Kansas with no offer from the B1G or SEC strikes me as intriguing -- especially if division-less football is adopted (so you can have an odd number like 13 or 15).

Nice data. It really presents the conundrum that the PAC faces moving forward, if/when expansion is required again. Unless there is a substantial change with research and athletic spending, there will undoubtedly need to be some type of compromise (whether that is on the academic side or the athletic side).
01-06-2019 12:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,395
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 145
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #40
PAC Expansion Strategy
Those academic ratings mean a lot, unless one that has a low rating can bring in money, which trumps academics.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
01-06-2019 07:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.