I think Baylor would fit in well in the ACC a lot of private schools in that league. Baylor is a national basketball champion so they would te ACC basketball

2019 College Rankings attendance per school, CFN Five Year Program Analysis
PAC WEST: Southern Cal, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State.
PAC EAST: Stanford, California, Utah, Colorado, Houston, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State.

#20: Southern Cal, 69, 044
#22: Washington, 65,781
#24: UCLA, 63,635
#29: Texas Tech, 56,925
#31: West Virginia, 56,640
#34: Oregon, 56,275
#36: Oklahoma State, 55,240
#37: Iowa State, 55,042
#38: Kansas State, 51,828
#39: Arizona State, 47,692
#42: Arizona, 47,692
#44: Utah, 46,344
#45: Stanford, 45,432
#47: Baylor, 44,775
#48: TCU, 44,720
#49: California, 44,505
#51: Colorado, 43,328
#60: Oregon State, 37,168
#68: Houston, 32,733
#73: Washington State, 30,790
#80: Kansas, 26,650

(07-23-2021 09:50 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  One correction. West Virginia had the XII invite before the ACC opening came.

But you are right it is questionable if they can get a lifeline. Kansas seems to have the best chance of getting one out of the XII.

WVU would have rejected the B12 if the ACC had come calling, just like TCU backed out of the BE when the B12 come. WVU is also in the B12 because of pressure from Joe Manchin, Jay Rockefeller and the late Robert C Byrd. If they had not put pressure on the B12 I think WVU gets left out in the cold in the last realignment. I have a feeling they would have taken Cincy instead.

(07-23-2021 10:06 PM)Tulsa Guy Wrote:  2019 College Rankings attendance per school, CFN Five Year Program Analysis

#20: Southern Cal, 69, 044
#22: Washington, 65,781
#24: UCLA, 63,635
#29: Texas Tech, 56,925
#31: West Virginia, 56,640
#34: Oregon, 56,275
#36: Oklahoma State, 55,240
#37: Iowa State, 55,042
#38: Kansas State, 51,828
#39: Arizona State, 47,692
#42: Arizona, 47,692
#44: Utah, 46,344
#45: Stanford, 45,432
#47: Baylor, 44,775
#48: TCU, 44,720
#49: California, 44,505
#51: Colorado, 43,328
#60: Oregon State, 37,168
#68: Houston, 32,733
#73: Washington State, 30,790
#80: Kansas, 26,650

While I tend to discount attendance in the G5 when whether its 15k or 25k its still low attendance, big attendance is a factor in the way the power leagues think about it.

XII has good attendance programs both FB/BB that are attractive enough to want to scoop up.

(07-23-2021 10:06 PM)Tulsa Guy Wrote:  2019 College Rankings attendance per school, CFN Five Year Program Analysis

#20: Southern Cal, 69, 044
#22: Washington, 65,781
#24: UCLA, 63,635
#29: Texas Tech, 56,925
#31: West Virginia, 56,640
#34: Oregon, 56,275
#36: Oklahoma State, 55,240
#37: Iowa State, 55,042
#38: Kansas State, 51,828
#39: Arizona State, 47,692
#42: Arizona, 47,692
#44: Utah, 46,344
#45: Stanford, 45,432
#47: Baylor, 44,775
#48: TCU, 44,720
#49: California, 44,505
#51: Colorado, 43,328
#60: Oregon State, 37,168
#68: Houston, 32,733
#73: Washington State, 30,790
#80: Kansas, 26,650

This should serve as a cautionary tale to the PAC 12 that without the LA schools, Washington, and Oregon they too are vulnerable.

(07-23-2021 10:06 PM)Tulsa Guy Wrote:  2019 College Rankings attendance per school, CFN Five Year Program Analysis

#20: Southern Cal, 69, 044
#22: Washington, 65,781
#24: UCLA, 63,635
#29: Texas Tech, 56,925
#31: West Virginia, 56,640
#34: Oregon, 56,275
#36: Oklahoma State, 55,240
#37: Iowa State, 55,042
#38: Kansas State, 51,828
#39: Arizona State, 47,692
#42: Arizona, 47,692
#44: Utah, 46,344
#45: Stanford, 45,432
#47: Baylor, 44,775
#48: TCU, 44,720
#49: California, 44,505
#51: Colorado, 43,328
#60: Oregon State, 37,168
#68: Houston, 32,733
#73: Washington State, 30,790
#80: Kansas, 26,650

That doesn't make one iota of difference. The Pac-12 is not taking any of the little-8. None of the schools help the valuation of the Pac-12 and adding any removes some rivalry games and adds travel without improving the TV revenue. It's not happening.

The B1G isn't taking anyone either, nor is the SEC, who took the two schools the Pac-12 and B1G would have taken given a chance. Finally there is the ACC and they are not taking any of the little-8, as Notre Dame project is their sole focus.

The hard reality is that the remaining Big 12 schools have to figure out how to navigate a decade in the wilderness, get into the 2030s without falling too far behind financially in the hope that the landscape will change and openings in the ACC (B1G raiding party, possible SEC counter raid) that could pull in a few of them. But it's a long wait.

(07-23-2021 07:52 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:24 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:06 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 06:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 06:39 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  1. KC Market
2. Brand
3. Central time zone

IMO, the KC market is not that big a deal. It's about the same size as the Hartford/New Haven (Connecticut) market, with worse demographics. Plus, this isn't 2011, when markets were all the rage. If they were, the PAC would have added Houston or SMU by now.

The Central Time zone is a minor deal.

Kansas has blue-blood hoops brand but their football is mud.

And it's football where the PAC is looking for help.

I just don't see it, at all. Basically, they provide basketball. But when is the last time someone was lured to another P5 because of basketball?

Central time zone is critical. PAC has a new "eastern exposure" strategy. Need to get games on earlier in the day, and unless you're willing to play games at 9 am pacific or 10 am mountain, you need teams in the central time zone.

Essentially what you're saying is "i do not see why the PAC would rescue Kansas except for all the reasons that the PAC would rescue Kansas."

The Pac-12 does not have an “eastern exposure” strategy. You are making that up. The Central Time Zone is not critical to the PAC. The PAC does not need KU.

It may be fake, but I didn’t make it up. Here’s a link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/...9-am-start

Googling “PAC East coast bias” should get you several similar results.

A speculative article in 2020 tells me nothing. I can speculate all day about things that could happen. UCLA played Cal at the Rose Bowl at 9 am on a Sunday morning with no fans in the stand in 2020. That is not going to happen again. Look, adding four Big 12 schools does not fix the Pac-12 network or fix the recruiting issues on the west coast. OU and UT leaving for the SEC does not mean that the Pac-12 has to do the remaining Big 12 schools a solid and bail them out.

(07-24-2021 12:11 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:52 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:24 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:06 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 06:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, the KC market is not that big a deal. It's about the same size as the Hartford/New Haven (Connecticut) market, with worse demographics. Plus, this isn't 2011, when markets were all the rage. If they were, the PAC would have added Houston or SMU by now.

The Central Time zone is a minor deal.

Kansas has blue-blood hoops brand but their football is mud.

And it's football where the PAC is looking for help.

I just don't see it, at all. Basically, they provide basketball. But when is the last time someone was lured to another P5 because of basketball?

Central time zone is critical. PAC has a new "eastern exposure" strategy. Need to get games on earlier in the day, and unless you're willing to play games at 9 am pacific or 10 am mountain, you need teams in the central time zone.

Essentially what you're saying is "i do not see why the PAC would rescue Kansas except for all the reasons that the PAC would rescue Kansas."

The Pac-12 does not have an “eastern exposure” strategy. You are making that up. The Central Time Zone is not critical to the PAC. The PAC does not need KU.

It may be fake, but I didn’t make it up. Here’s a link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/...9-am-start

Googling “PAC East coast bias” should get you several similar results.

A speculative article in 2020 tells me nothing. I can speculate all day about things that could happen. UCLA played Cal at the Rose Bowl at 9 am on a Sunday morning with no fans in the stand in 2020. That is not going to happen again. Look, adding four Big 12 schools does not fix the Pac-12 network or fix the recruiting issues on the west coast. OU and UT leaving for the SEC does not mean that the Pac-12 has to do the remaining Big 12 schools a solid and bail them out.

You don’t have to speculate very far. USC didn’t play ASU at 9 am on “opening weekend” because they wanted to play in the morning. It is obvious they are trying to accommodate the East coast. It’s basic inference skills, not speculation.

I’ve never said that the PAC should add four Big XII schools, so idk what you’re on about. My position this entire time has been that the Big Ten and ACC will do nothing while the PAC adds Kansas and one of Tech or ISU. Frank has persuaded me that TCU is also a possibility for the DFW market. I agree that four is overkill, but two central time zone schools is a meaningful advantage to the PAC and the PAC-12 network.

(07-24-2021 12:28 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 12:11 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:52 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:24 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:06 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  Central time zone is critical. PAC has a new "eastern exposure" strategy. Need to get games on earlier in the day, and unless you're willing to play games at 9 am pacific or 10 am mountain, you need teams in the central time zone.

Essentially what you're saying is "i do not see why the PAC would rescue Kansas except for all the reasons that the PAC would rescue Kansas."

The Pac-12 does not have an “eastern exposure” strategy. You are making that up. The Central Time Zone is not critical to the PAC. The PAC does not need KU.

It may be fake, but I didn’t make it up. Here’s a link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/...9-am-start

Googling “PAC East coast bias” should get you several similar results.

A speculative article in 2020 tells me nothing. I can speculate all day about things that could happen. UCLA played Cal at the Rose Bowl at 9 am on a Sunday morning with no fans in the stand in 2020. That is not going to happen again. Look, adding four Big 12 schools does not fix the Pac-12 network or fix the recruiting issues on the west coast. OU and UT leaving for the SEC does not mean that the Pac-12 has to do the remaining Big 12 schools a solid and bail them out.

You don’t have to speculate very far. USC didn’t play ASU at 9 am on “opening weekend” because they wanted to play in the morning. It is obvious they are trying to accommodate the East coast. It’s basic inference skills, not speculation.

I’ve never said that the PAC should add four Big XII schools, so idk what you’re on about. My position this entire time has been that the Big Ten and ACC will do nothing while the PAC adds Kansas and one of Tech or ISU. Frank has persuaded me that TCU is also a possibility for the DFW market. I agree that four is overkill, but two central time zone schools is a meaningful advantage to the PAC and the PAC-12 network.

USC played ASU in LA at 9 am with no fans in their opening game of the season in November. They were trying to salvage a season. They will never do that with fans in attendance. In LA, they will never accept 9 am start times for games. This was a Larry Scott idea and he is gone.

The divisions are ****ed up if the PAC adds only two out East. 14 teams means one school from the PAC8 is out, or do they do 8+6 or some wacky north south split that’s even worse for travel?

I think KU is going to the B1G as a placeholder personally, but TCU OSU KSU TTech is the only play if that’s the direction they go in. I don’t think you can just dabble with 1 or 2 schools if you want to build a presence there. Otherwise, PAC will never expand again unless out of necessity (losing existing teams to realignment or independence).

(07-23-2021 08:48 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The reporting on the latter at the time was that it was about a billion, about $7m / school / year.

Suppose that adding Kansas would increase the value to $10m / school / year, basically all due to Basketball. That implies that the total value of $7m+$3mx12 = $43m / year. That would be an over the top estimate.

And then not all of that media value is taken away from the other 5 power basketball conferences, a lot of it is increased or reduced interest by people who are fans of a school, rather than some floating pool of "fans of college basketball".

To be conservative, suppose that half of the value is viewer switching, and that it's evenly distributed across the five power conferences ... when on the geographic distribution of the AAC, it would affect the ACC and SEC more than the Big Ten, Big East or PAC-12.

$43m * 0.5 * 0.2 = $4.3m.

So that's one back of the envelope calculation of the net impact on the Big Ten value. I think all of those values are on the high side, so it's a clear overestimate.

Sorry I’m not following. I’m suggesting a hypothetical “Big American” with additions of:

East: KSU KU ISU WVU + UC Memphis (Wichita State)?
West: Baylor TCU OSU TTech + Houston, (BYU)?

What’s the value per school there? That’s well north of a billion for BBall alone over a decade and change. The football contract with ESPN is probably double the BBall contract. With those tough estimates I’m getting roughly 21 million per school over 12 years.

(07-24-2021 02:14 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 12:28 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 12:11 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:52 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:24 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  The Pac-12 does not have an “eastern exposure” strategy. You are making that up. The Central Time Zone is not critical to the PAC. The PAC does not need KU.

It may be fake, but I didn’t make it up. Here’s a link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/...9-am-start

Googling “PAC East coast bias” should get you several similar results.

A speculative article in 2020 tells me nothing. I can speculate all day about things that could happen. UCLA played Cal at the Rose Bowl at 9 am on a Sunday morning with no fans in the stand in 2020. That is not going to happen again. Look, adding four Big 12 schools does not fix the Pac-12 network or fix the recruiting issues on the west coast. OU and UT leaving for the SEC does not mean that the Pac-12 has to do the remaining Big 12 schools a solid and bail them out.

You don’t have to speculate very far. USC didn’t play ASU at 9 am on “opening weekend” because they wanted to play in the morning. It is obvious they are trying to accommodate the East coast. It’s basic inference skills, not speculation.

I’ve never said that the PAC should add four Big XII schools, so idk what you’re on about. My position this entire time has been that the Big Ten and ACC will do nothing while the PAC adds Kansas and one of Tech or ISU. Frank has persuaded me that TCU is also a possibility for the DFW market. I agree that four is overkill, but two central time zone schools is a meaningful advantage to the PAC and the PAC-12 network.

USC played ASU in LA at 9 am with no fans in their opening game of the season in November. They were trying to salvage a season. They will never do that with fans in attendance. In LA, they will never accept 9 am start times for games. This was a Larry Scott idea and he is gone.

And they wouldn’t have to ever accept 9 am games with central time zone teams, that’s the entire point.

(07-24-2021 07:25 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 02:14 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 12:28 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 12:11 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 07:52 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  It may be fake, but I didn’t make it up. Here’s a link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/...9-am-start

Googling “PAC East coast bias” should get you several similar results.

A speculative article in 2020 tells me nothing. I can speculate all day about things that could happen. UCLA played Cal at the Rose Bowl at 9 am on a Sunday morning with no fans in the stand in 2020. That is not going to happen again. Look, adding four Big 12 schools does not fix the Pac-12 network or fix the recruiting issues on the west coast. OU and UT leaving for the SEC does not mean that the Pac-12 has to do the remaining Big 12 schools a solid and bail them out.

You don’t have to speculate very far. USC didn’t play ASU at 9 am on “opening weekend” because they wanted to play in the morning. It is obvious they are trying to accommodate the East coast. It’s basic inference skills, not speculation.

I’ve never said that the PAC should add four Big XII schools, so idk what you’re on about. My position this entire time has been that the Big Ten and ACC will do nothing while the PAC adds Kansas and one of Tech or ISU. Frank has persuaded me that TCU is also a possibility for the DFW market. I agree that four is overkill, but two central time zone schools is a meaningful advantage to the PAC and the PAC-12 network.

USC played ASU in LA at 9 am with no fans in their opening game of the season in November. They were trying to salvage a season. They will never do that with fans in attendance. In LA, they will never accept 9 am start times for games. This was a Larry Scott idea and he is gone.

And they wouldn’t have to ever accept 9 am games with central time zone teams, that’s the entire point.

I don't think the Central Time Zone is worth diluting the PAC brand and money with Big 12 leftovers. Plus, won't those CT teams want to play games at times convenient to them too? A 12 noon kickoff in Kansas is 10 AM on the West Coast.

But maybe I am wrong.

10AM on a Saturday is a good time slot if you don’t have kids or events. Not as good as NFL in Europe Sunday morning but a decent slot nonetheless. Or maybe play a 2pm CT game in Manhattan or Stillwater.

(07-24-2021 08:00 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think the Central Time Zone is worth diluting the PAC brand and money with Big 12 leftovers.

I mostly agree, which is why the path is narrow, and why I don't think the PAC would take more than two. If they can't get Kansas, I doubt they expand at all.

(07-24-2021 08:00 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Plus, won't those CT teams want to play games at times convenient to them too?

Yeah, but if you require both of them to host an 11 am CST game 3-4 times per season, it's a small price to pay for P4 membership.

(07-24-2021 04:52 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  The divisions are ****ed up if the PAC adds only two out East. 14 teams means one school from the PAC8 is out, or do they do 8+6 or some wacky north south split that’s even worse for travel?

I think KU is going to the B1G as a placeholder personally, but TCU OSU KSU TTech is the only play if that’s the direction they go in. I don’t think you can just dabble with 1 or 2 schools if you want to build a presence there. Otherwise, PAC will never expand again unless out of necessity (losing existing teams to realignment or independence).

PAC should definitely go with 4.

TCU- DFW market.
Tech- Quasi western P5 school.
OSU- Quasi SEC level program.

The PAC may want to look at Houston over K-State for recruiting purposes.

(07-24-2021 10:38 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(07-24-2021 08:00 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think the Central Time Zone is worth diluting the PAC brand and money with Big 12 leftovers.

I mostly agree, which is why the path is narrow, and why I don't think the PAC would take more than two. If they can't get Kansas, I doubt they expand at all.

(07-24-2021 08:00 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Plus, won't those CT teams want to play games at times convenient to them too?

Yeah, but if you require both of them to host an 11 am CST game 3-4 times per season, it's a small price to pay for P4 membership.

Oh, I have no doubt at all that Kansas and/or ISU would jump through 20 hoops of Joy if this was the condition for joining the PAC. They are in pure desperation mode.

It's the PAC side that I am not convinced about. IMO, the PAC has basically no good reason to add what IMO are pretty low-value football brands a thousand miles from their cultural core.

But hey, I've been wrong plenty times before.

I have to wonder if AZ schools won’t mind playing in Texas with an East division. I know CU wouldn’t mind since that is their recruiting area. CA recruiting isn’t what it used to be.

Texas tech, TCU, Houston and Kansas make a nice pick up for the pac 12 to get an 8 team eastern division. I don’t see the pac 12 taking Oklahoma state, Kansas state, Iowa State, or Baylor under any circumstance. If the pac 12 passed on TCU, I could see 1 from UNLV, New Mexico or Colorado State fill out the 8 team east side.

(07-23-2021 10:05 PM)PusherT Wrote:  I think Baylor would fit in well in the ACC a lot of private schools in that league. Baylor is a national basketball champion so they would te ACC basketball

If Baylor were in Tennessee then there might be some discussion on that front. Unfortunately, even if it is a decent brand in Texas, that is a very far way from any of the ACC. They aren’t going to add one, or even two schools, sitting on island where the nearest competitor is a thousand miles away.

Instead, the ACC will wait on Notre Dame, or maybe take WVU and Cincy as a pair and call it a day. Those would be good schools with good cultural and geographic fits and good athletic departments.