https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/07/23/n...interview/

New Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff chose his words carefully but made his point clear after a new realignment wave formed in the middle of the Power Five.

The conference could be open for business if the right opportunity surfaces.

“I consider the Pac-12 an exclusive club with a high barrier to entry,’’ Kliavkoff said Thursday when asked about a Houston Chronicle report indicating that Big 12 anchors Texas and Oklahoma are interested in joining the SEC.

“I love the schools and the teams we have today. We are not actively seeking to poach any teams from any conferences. But we’d be foolish not to listen if schools call us.”

If Texas and Oklahoma were to join the SEC (or become Independents), it’s unclear which Big 12 schools would be attractive to the Pac-12 given its desire for universities that fit culturally and competitively, bring significant media value and meet the conference’s academic standards.

(Of the eight schools potentially left behind, only Kansas and Iowa State are members of the prestigious Association of American Universities.)

But Kliavkoff’s open-minded stance on Pac-12 membership mirrors his position on so many other matters:

Everything is under consideration for the conference, which has new leadership during a transformative time in college athletics.

(07-23-2021 09:42 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/07/23/n...interview/

New Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff chose his words carefully but made his point clear after a new realignment wave formed in the middle of the Power Five.

Everything is under consideration for the conference,[/b] which has new leadership during a transformative time in college athletics.

Well, KSU fans just breathed a sigh of relief.

Of the remaining B12 teams, WV is obviously out of this mix, TCU is for sure not a cultural fit. Baylor may not be either.

Kansas and Iowa State are AAU, and I'm sure would be invited if they asked. Jayhawks (like me) prefer the B1G, but an eastern Pac Quad with ISU, TT and OSU or KSU wouldn't be the worst thing to happen.

Note that the subject line is misleading given the contents of the post. Nothing in the contents of the post indicate the PAC 12 is interested. The new commissioner refrains from saying whether it is or is not, but does so in a polite way.

(07-23-2021 10:00 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Note that the subject line is misleading given the contents of the post. Nothing in the contents of the post indicate the PAC 12 is interested. The new commissioner refrains from saying whether it is or is not, but does so in a polite way.

agreed.

sure the PAC will listen and with TV deals coming up they may listen closely.

but to say their interested is a bit of stretch

(07-23-2021 10:00 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Note that the subject line is misleading given the contents of the post. Nothing in the contents of the post indicate the PAC 12 is interested. The new commissioner refrains from saying whether it is or is not, but does so in a polite way.

I took the "high bar to entry" comment to be about academics and endowments. Basically, KU/ISU as AAU schools and Texas Tech due to its sheer size (and OK academics). They'll take someone else to make a quad - they'd probably rank them 1) OSU, 2) KSU, 3) Baylor (due to cultural fit) - but the Pac also has Wash St and AZ St, which are on par with OSU/KSU.

(07-23-2021 09:52 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 09:42 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/07/23/n...interview/

New Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff chose his words carefully but made his point clear after a new realignment wave formed in the middle of the Power Five.

Everything is under consideration for the conference,[/b] which has new leadership during a transformative time in college athletics.

Well, KSU fans just breathed a sigh of relief.

Of the remaining B12 teams, WV is obviously out of this mix, TCU is for sure not a cultural fit. Baylor may not be either.

Kansas and Iowa State are AAU, and I'm sure would be invited if they asked. Jayhawks (like me) prefer the B1G, but an eastern Pac Quad with ISU, TT and OSU or KSU wouldn't be the worst thing to happen.

I think it's the other way around. Baylor *definitely* isn't a cultural fit with the Pac-12 - they're essentially on the same plane as BYU with respect to the Pac-12.

TCU is an interesting case - despite their name superficially, it doesn't have the same religious-based restrictions and policies that complicate matters with Baylor and BYU. It's a good academic school directly located in a massive fast-growing media market in the middle of one of the most important football recruiting areas in the country. In essence, it's like a Texas version of a Wake Forest-type private school, which may very well be culturally palatable for the Pac-12 compared to other options.

Also, I think people tend to underrate the conference realignment value of private schools (provided that they have a good location with solid academics) simply due to small enrollment size and then overrate non-flagship/flagship-equivalent public schools on the flip side due to large enrollment size. In reality, private schools actually get a bit of a bump in conference realignment analysis whereas non-flagship/flagship-equivalent public schools get docked several points.

I'm not saying that the Pac-12 will take TCU. Frankly, my wager would be that they don't take anyone from the Big 12 leftovers at all. However, if we're ranking who would be most attractive to the Pac-12 in theory, it may very well be (1) Kansas and (2) TCU... and it's hard for me to see anyone else. Remember that this was a league that was having a hard time swallowing the thought of adding Oklahoma State and Texas Tech even WITH Texas and Oklahoma coming along. I can't see how the Pac-12 would actually want either of those schools *without* UT and OU.

(07-23-2021 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 09:52 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 09:42 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/07/23/n...interview/

New Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff chose his words carefully but made his point clear after a new realignment wave formed in the middle of the Power Five.

Everything is under consideration for the conference,[/b] which has new leadership during a transformative time in college athletics.

Well, KSU fans just breathed a sigh of relief.

Of the remaining B12 teams, WV is obviously out of this mix, TCU is for sure not a cultural fit. Baylor may not be either.

Kansas and Iowa State are AAU, and I'm sure would be invited if they asked. Jayhawks (like me) prefer the B1G, but an eastern Pac Quad with ISU, TT and OSU or KSU wouldn't be the worst thing to happen.

I think it's the other way around. Baylor *definitely* isn't a cultural fit with the Pac-12 - they're essentially on the same plane as BYU with respect to the Pac-12.

TCU is an interesting case - despite their name superficially, it doesn't have the same religious-based restrictions and policies that complicate matters with Baylor and BYU. It's a good academic school directly located in a massive fast-growing media market in the middle of one of the most important football recruiting areas in the country. In essence, it's like a Texas version of a Wake Forest-type private school, which may very well be culturally palatable for the Pac-12 compared to other options.

Also, I think people tend to underrate the conference realignment value of private schools (provided that they have a good location with solid academics) simply due to small enrollment size and then overrate non-flagship/flagship-equivalent public schools on the flip side due to large enrollment size. In reality, private schools actually get a bit of a bump in conference realignment analysis whereas non-flagship/flagship-equivalent public schools get docked several points.

I'm not saying that the Pac-12 will take TCU. Frankly, my wager would be that they don't take anyone from the Big 12 leftovers at all. However, if we're ranking who would be most attractive to the Pac-12 in theory, it may very well be (1) Kansas and (2) TCU... and it's hard for me to see anyone else. Remember that this was a league that was having a hard time swallowing the thought of adding Oklahoma State and Texas Tech even WITH Texas and Oklahoma coming along. I can't see how the Pac-12 would actually want either of those schools *without* UT and OU.

What about AAU Iowa State as a partner for Kansas if additions are desired?

Too bad Rice doesn't have a pulse or they would make a good partner for a potential TCU addition.

I don't see any schools that really fit the PAC's culture and wants.

West Virginia is obviously too far
They are not taking any religious private school - Baylor and TCU out.
Only two schools have AAU status- Texas Tech, Ok St, and Kansas St out

That leaves Kansas and Iowa St. Two rural schools in the Great Plains with lackluster football programs, and that's saying it nicely for Kansas. Kansas has a huge basketball program on the other hand. Is that enough though? I find it hard to believe the PAC would double their geographic footprint just for these two.

The only logical move for PAC, if they want to add teams, is to go to 16 too. They'll have to lower their standards and probably add Texas Tech and Oklahoma St. I just don't see Iowa St. and Kansas being enough to make it worth it. They could go to pods:

Plains
Iowa St.
Kansas
Oklahoma St.
Texas Tech

South
Utah
Colorado
Arizona
Arizona St.

California
UCLA
USC
Stanford
Cal

PNW
UWash
Wash St
Oregon
Oregon St.

(07-23-2021 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 09:52 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 09:42 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/07/23/n...interview/

New Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff chose his words carefully but made his point clear after a new realignment wave formed in the middle of the Power Five.

Everything is under consideration for the conference,[/b] which has new leadership during a transformative time in college athletics.

Well, KSU fans just breathed a sigh of relief.

Of the remaining B12 teams, WV is obviously out of this mix, TCU is for sure not a cultural fit. Baylor may not be either.

Kansas and Iowa State are AAU, and I'm sure would be invited if they asked. Jayhawks (like me) prefer the B1G, but an eastern Pac Quad with ISU, TT and OSU or KSU wouldn't be the worst thing to happen.

I think it's the other way around. Baylor *definitely* isn't a cultural fit with the Pac-12 - they're essentially on the same plane as BYU with respect to the Pac-12.

TCU is an interesting case - despite their name superficially, it doesn't have the same religious-based restrictions and policies that complicate matters with Baylor and BYU. It's a good academic school directly located in a massive fast-growing media market in the middle of one of the most important football recruiting areas in the country. In essence, it's like a Texas version of a Wake Forest-type private school, which may very well be culturally palatable for the Pac-12 compared to other options.

Also, I think people tend to underrate the conference realignment value of private schools (provided that they have a good location with solid academics) simply due to small enrollment size and then overrate non-flagship/flagship-equivalent public schools on the flip side due to large enrollment size. In reality, private schools actually get a bit of a bump in conference realignment analysis whereas non-flagship/flagship-equivalent public schools get docked several points.

I'm not saying that the Pac-12 will take TCU. Frankly, my wager would be that they don't take anyone from the Big 12 leftovers at all. However, if we're ranking who would be most attractive to the Pac-12 in theory, it may very well be (1) Kansas and (2) TCU... and it's hard for me to see anyone else. Remember that this was a league that was having a hard time swallowing the thought of adding Oklahoma State and Texas Tech even WITH Texas and Oklahoma coming along. I can't see how the Pac-12 would actually want either of those schools *without* UT and OU.

I agree with you - except the pattern in the Pac is partner schools - Wash/Wash St, Or/Or St, Cal/Stanford, UCLA/USC, AZ/AZST, UT/CO.. for it to make sense travel wise you'd need 16 and an eastern quad. Why KS/ISU makes sense, I hear what you say about TCU, but they're gonna have to choke down one more.

(07-23-2021 10:11 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Too bad Rice doesn't have a pulse or they would make a good partner for a potential TCU addition.

It's a shame Rice hasn't invested in athletics for so long. If they had decent football and basketball, they would be a fantastic pick for the PAC. AAU school, huge endowment, fantastic location in a huge city, great for traveling and recruiting, fantastic history, great name, and compared to the other private Texas schools, they have no religious connection. Really could be the Stanford of Texas.

(07-23-2021 10:19 AM)dawgonit Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 10:11 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Too bad Rice doesn't have a pulse or they would make a good partner for a potential TCU addition.

It's a shame Rice hasn't invested in athletics for so long. If they had decent football and basketball, they would be a fantastic pick for the PAC. AAU school, huge endowment, fantastic location in a huge city, great for traveling and recruiting, fantastic history, great name, and compared to the other private Texas schools, they have no religious connection. Really could be the Stanford of Texas.

Agreed, with the emphasis on the word of simply "decent" - they're such a great academic school that they'd have a ton of conference realignment value with a merely competent athletic department (much less a great one). If Rice had Baylor's athletic record (minus the various infractions over the years), they could be in the Big Ten.

(07-23-2021 10:25 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 10:19 AM)dawgonit Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 10:11 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Too bad Rice doesn't have a pulse or they would make a good partner for a potential TCU addition.

It's a shame Rice hasn't invested in athletics for so long. If they had decent football and basketball, they would be a fantastic pick for the PAC. AAU school, huge endowment, fantastic location in a huge city, great for traveling and recruiting, fantastic history, great name, and compared to the other private Texas schools, they have no religious connection. Really could be the Stanford of Texas.

Agreed, with the emphasis on the word of simply "decent" - they're such a great academic school that they'd have a ton of conference realignment value with a merely competent athletic department (much less a great one). If Rice had Baylor's athletic record (minus the various infractions over the years), they could be in the Big Ten.

If Rice had as many fans in their stadium as they do on this message board they’d sell out every game.

(07-23-2021 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I'm not saying that the Pac-12 will take TCU. Frankly, my wager would be that they don't take anyone from the Big 12 leftovers at all. However, if we're ranking who would be most attractive to the Pac-12 in theory, it may very well be (1) Kansas and (2) TCU... and it's hard for me to see anyone else. Remember that this was a league that was having a hard time swallowing the thought of adding Oklahoma State and Texas Tech even WITH Texas and Oklahoma coming along. I can't see how the Pac-12 would actually want either of those schools *without* UT and OU.

I would agree, I think the likely answer is no school, but the only two of interest would be Kansas and TCU. I remember when the Pac-10 was looking at expansion in 2010, they liked Kansas. They felt KU was a good fit. TCU being good academically and in the DFW market would help their cause. But none of the eight will be considered without a significant increase in TV revenue.

(07-23-2021 10:14 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 09:52 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  

(07-23-2021 09:42 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/07/23/n...interview/

New Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff chose his words carefully but made his point clear after a new realignment wave formed in the middle of the Power Five.

Everything is under consideration for the conference,[/b] which has new leadership during a transformative time in college athletics.

Well, KSU fans just breathed a sigh of relief.

Of the remaining B12 teams, WV is obviously out of this mix, TCU is for sure not a cultural fit. Baylor may not be either.

Kansas and Iowa State are AAU, and I'm sure would be invited if they asked. Jayhawks (like me) prefer the B1G, but an eastern Pac Quad with ISU, TT and OSU or KSU wouldn't be the worst thing to happen.

I think it's the other way around. Baylor *definitely* isn't a cultural fit with the Pac-12 - they're essentially on the same plane as BYU with respect to the Pac-12.

TCU is an interesting case - despite their name superficially, it doesn't have the same religious-based restrictions and policies that complicate matters with Baylor and BYU. It's a good academic school directly located in a massive fast-growing media market in the middle of one of the most important football recruiting areas in the country. In essence, it's like a Texas version of a Wake Forest-type private school, which may very well be culturally palatable for the Pac-12 compared to other options.

Also, I think people tend to underrate the conference realignment value of private schools (provided that they have a good location with solid academics) simply due to small enrollment size and then overrate non-flagship/flagship-equivalent public schools on the flip side due to large enrollment size. In reality, private schools actually get a bit of a bump in conference realignment analysis whereas non-flagship/flagship-equivalent public schools get docked several points.

I'm not saying that the Pac-12 will take TCU. Frankly, my wager would be that they don't take anyone from the Big 12 leftovers at all. However, if we're ranking who would be most attractive to the Pac-12 in theory, it may very well be (1) Kansas and (2) TCU... and it's hard for me to see anyone else. Remember that this was a league that was having a hard time swallowing the thought of adding Oklahoma State and Texas Tech even WITH Texas and Oklahoma coming along. I can't see how the Pac-12 would actually want either of those schools *without* UT and OU.

I agree with you - except the pattern in the Pac is partner schools - Wash/Wash St, Or/Or St, Cal/Stanford, UCLA/USC, AZ/AZST, UT/CO.. for it to make sense travel wise you'd need 16 and an eastern quad. Why KS/ISU makes sense, I hear what you say about TCU, but they're gonna have to choke down one more.

Right - the challenge for ISU for anyone is simply that it's located in Iowa. The Kansas (school) market is undercounted by just looking at the state population because it's directly located in the KC metro area that is largely in Missouri (which is a legit media market). It's unfortunate since ISU has an excellent fan base with great academics, but this is where location becomes such a tough reality factor. In contrast, you can't beat TCU's actual location and I think that, when push comes to shove, that matters more than trying to take another school largely for travel partner purposes. Note that in the Pac-16 proposal, the original intent was to have Colorado essentially out on its own without any travel partner. It was only after that Pac-16 proposal fell through that Utah was chosen.

(07-23-2021 10:00 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Note that the subject line is misleading given the contents of the post. Nothing in the contents of the post indicate the PAC 12 is interested. The new commissioner refrains from saying whether it is or is not, but does so in a polite way.

I changed the thread title to Pac 12 open to adding Big 12 schools.

I mostly agree with Frank. I don’t think TCU is not quite comparable to Wake Forest, though. TCU is dead last in the P5 ranked by research expenditure, far below Oregon, currently lowest in the PAC. Wake, in contrast, actually spends a decent amount on research. There is a clear contrast in priorities between TCU and the rest of the PAC, whereas the difference between Wake and the rest of the PAC is more nuanced.

I actually think it’s unlikely that the B1G decides to expand, so Kansas ends up in the PAC. Then Tech/ISU/TCU will join them to make the PAC-14. I don’t buy in to the idea that expanding to 16 is necessary.

Would you say that TCU is no more religious than Duke? I know Duke is nominally Methodist IIRC

TCU is a very good undergrad school but not a research powerhouse. However they have two top 3 finishes in the last 10 years. Oregon is the only other school with more than 1 top 3 over the last 50 years that doesn’t have an MNC.

(07-23-2021 10:55 AM)Erictelevision Wrote:  Would you say that TCU is no more religious than Duke? I know Duke is nominally Methodist IIRC

Let me see if I can answer this without getting too political….

A Eastern/ Southern Conservative conference is more open and understanding to religious beliefs than a Western Liberal based conference. The PAC is accepting if you believe like they believe. Not so much if you don’t. See BYU

Edit: The ACC would have zero problems with TCU or Baylor as far as their faith based doctrine goes. The PAC would most likely have problems.

(07-23-2021 10:52 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  I mostly agree with Frank. I don’t think TCU is not quite comparable to Wake Forest, though. TCU is dead last in the P5 ranked by research expenditure, far below Oregon, currently lowest in the PAC. Wake, in contrast, actually spends a decent amount on research. There is a clear contrast in priorities between TCU and the rest of the PAC, whereas the difference between Wake and the rest of the PAC is more nuanced.

I actually think it’s unlikely that the B1G decides to expand, so Kansas ends up in the PAC. Then Tech/ISU/TCU will join them to make the PAC-14. I don’t buy in to the idea that expanding to 16 is necessary.

This just might be my puny Memphis brain operating without the benefit of a Big Ten education, and disregard if so, but I think adding 4 teams to the Pac 12 would be... a certain number.

I don't think they NEED anyone, but KU+3 of the others would make enough sense to justify it. Then rebrand to PAC and you're basically good, or spit in god's eye with Pac 16.