(07-02-2022 04:03 PM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  Doubt the PAC would take SMU for 2 reasons. #1 It is a religious affiliated school and #2 it resides in Texas.
As long as Cal and Stanford have anything to say about it at least.

I was just throwing the first schools that came to mind.

In my dream scenario, the Mountain West schools hold strong and the Big 12 does take its choice of schools. That puts the death knell in the Pac12.

(07-01-2022 01:39 PM)Pounder Wrote:  

(07-01-2022 11:16 AM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(07-01-2022 10:19 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  

(06-30-2022 10:05 PM)RCI Wrote:  No matter, it is an earthquake and things will be rearranged. What about the Rose Bowl? Seems like maybe three super conferences, West, North, and South, and a whole bunch of schools "left out." The NCAA is likely in analysis mode.

I think we are headed toward an entirely new Super Division, and the filthy rich will shake loose from the rest of us little fish.

Maybe in football. Probably not in basketball

Think about it this way… a 20-to-24 school SEC and a 20-to-24 school Big 10. Their conference playoffs are the “national playoffs” and the game between the winners is the “national championship.” This feels like a possibility at this point.

Yet it won’t be a breakaway from the NCAA. Better to keep the basketball process as it currently stands, among other things. If each conference places 10 teams in a given March Madness, how much $ is that compared to the added confusion of breaking off to your own gig without the possibility of real Cinderella stories?

I agree. When all the realignment shifting began I thought the "Power conferences" would consolidate into 4 mega conferences...boy was I wrong. It's going to be the Big10 and SEC then everyone else in a 2nd tier well below them.

(07-02-2022 04:08 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:03 PM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  Doubt the PAC would take SMU for 2 reasons. #1 It is a religious affiliated school and #2 it resides in Texas.
As long as Cal and Stanford have anything to say about it at least.

Not that SMU is a serious candidate, but if Cal and Stanford really care about athletics, they will accept the schools that are the best, regardless of their location.

Question, didn't the state of California prohibit state funded schools from competing in Texas due to some political or social grievance a few years back? Is that still an issue?

(07-02-2022 10:52 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  In my dream scenario, the Mountain West schools hold strong and the Big 12 does take its choice of schools. That puts the death knell in the Pac12.

To many NCAA credits in the Pac12 for the league to go away and there are already MW schools advocating for themselves to be the next to join the PAC.

(07-03-2022 06:33 AM)FirstandGoal Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:08 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:03 PM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  Doubt the PAC would take SMU for 2 reasons. #1 It is a religious affiliated school and #2 it resides in Texas.
As long as Cal and Stanford have anything to say about it at least.

Not that SMU is a serious candidate, but if Cal and Stanford really care about athletics, they will accept the schools that are the best, regardless of their location.

Question, didn't the state of California prohibit state funded schools from competing in Texas due to some political or social grievance a few years back? Is that still an issue?

I believe the ban is on using California state funds, they have fund trips out of a non-state account. Bakersfield showed up in Edinburg in 2020 and Sac State baseball played two series in Texas in 2021. Unless Xavier Becerra has tightened up his interpretation recently it should still be possible.

(07-03-2022 11:33 AM)edinburger Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 06:33 AM)FirstandGoal Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:08 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:03 PM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  Doubt the PAC would take SMU for 2 reasons. #1 It is a religious affiliated school and #2 it resides in Texas.
As long as Cal and Stanford have anything to say about it at least.

Not that SMU is a serious candidate, but if Cal and Stanford really care about athletics, they will accept the schools that are the best, regardless of their location.

Question, didn't the state of California prohibit state funded schools from competing in Texas due to some political or social grievance a few years back? Is that still an issue?

I believe the ban is on using California state funds, they have fund trips out of a non-state account. Bakersfield showed up in Edinburg in 2020 and Sac State baseball played two series in Texas in 2021. Unless Xavier Becerra has tightened up his interpretation recently it should still be possible.

I think we were grandfathered in since we were already in the WAC when that law was passed. And yeah, the loophole is to use "private funds".

(07-03-2022 06:33 AM)FirstandGoal Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:08 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:03 PM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  Doubt the PAC would take SMU for 2 reasons. #1 It is a religious affiliated school and #2 it resides in Texas.
As long as Cal and Stanford have anything to say about it at least.

Not that SMU is a serious candidate, but if Cal and Stanford really care about athletics, they will accept the schools that are the best, regardless of their location.

Question, didn't the state of California prohibit state funded schools from competing in Texas due to some political or social grievance a few years back? Is that still an issue?

Arizona and Utah are in the Pac 12 already. Not sure if this will have implications on staying in the Pac 12 or not.

Here's the webpage about PROHIBITION ON STATE-FUNDED AND STATE-SPONSORED TRAVEL TO STATES WITH DISCRIMINATORY LAWS (ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 1887)
: https://oag.ca.gov/ab1887

I cannot vouch for this but it was reported online:

According to a report from Jason Scheer of 247Sports, Arizona may be meeting with officials from the Big 12 as early as this week to explore a possible move to the Big 12. And that’s not all. Three other Pac-12 schools could contemplate a move to the Big 12.

Another rumor is Oregon and Washington are talking to the Big 10.

Still yet another statement was the PAC schools wanted to stay together.

Conclusion: To early to know what will happen.

(07-02-2022 04:08 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  Not that SMU is a serious candidate, but if Cal and Stanford really care about athletics, they will accept the schools that are the best, regardless of their location.

They care about athletics enough that, in sports that your schools and my schools do not have, they’re intensely competitive.

But no, they care more about academics.

One rumor has Stanford and Notre Dame being the next B1G invites, so remember that California still has that “try not to associate with Texas” edict, and Cal IS the kind of school where students call out their athletes for not making grades. So don’t be surprised by any number of decisions the Pac makes that seem like dodgy business.

(07-04-2022 07:49 PM)RCI Wrote:  I cannot vouch for this but it was reported online:

According to a report from Jason Scheer of 247Sports, Arizona may be meeting with officials from the Big 12 as early as this week to explore a possible move to the Big 12. And that’s not all. Three other Pac-12 schools could contemplate a move to the Big 12.

Another rumor is Oregon and Washington are talking to the Big 10.

Still yet another statement was the PAC schools wanted to stay together.

Conclusion: To early to know what will happen.

Oregon and Washington have formally applied for Big 10 membership. The Big 10 gas notified both schools that they are awaiting a decision by Notre Dame before adding more schools.

(07-03-2022 06:33 AM)FirstandGoal Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:08 PM)DoubleRSU Wrote:  

(07-02-2022 04:03 PM)Spolovilo4EVER Wrote:  Doubt the PAC would take SMU for 2 reasons. #1 It is a religious affiliated school and #2 it resides in Texas.
As long as Cal and Stanford have anything to say about it at least.

Not that SMU is a serious candidate, but if Cal and Stanford really care about athletics, they will accept the schools that are the best, regardless of their location.

Question, didn't the state of California prohibit state funded schools from competing in Texas due to some political or social grievance a few years back? Is that still an issue?

Yes, Texas and about half of the other states, including Indiana, Iowa, and Ohio, states that have schools in UCLA’s new home conference. I suppose the Bruins will use private funds for travel to these states.

This has been up on the net a while:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/big-te...02594dd6ba

(07-05-2022 11:28 AM)RCI Wrote:  This has been up on the net a while:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/big-te...02594dd6ba

Portland journalist was interviewing an expert with some knowledge with what schools/markets have potential value to a conference. The expert kind of dodged the question for a while until the journalist pressed.

He gave Oregon about $30M/year value to the B1G. Then posed Stanford at about $45M of same. Much larger market, school with obvious academic reputation, and while their football comes and goes, there are several year-in year-out NC caliber programs. This Duck has no problem with that valuation. While Stanford isn’t quite the same makeup as Berkeley (my wife laughs at any mention of Stanford as “liberal”), however, they can very much employ out-of-box thinking and could chart their own path. But should probably accept a rumored B1G invite.

I would argue about the article comparing Portland as a market to Baltimore, Milwaukee, and Indianapolis, because it’s a larger metro by all measures, and still growing substantially. Rural populations are where things even out a bit… just a nitpick there.

One buzz going around this afternoon is that Notre Dame rejected the B1G again. Mind you, we were probably at the end of a cycle June 30, so it could be a while before the next steps play out.

(07-05-2022 04:17 PM)Pounder Wrote:  

(07-05-2022 11:28 AM)RCI Wrote:  This has been up on the net a while:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/big-te...02594dd6ba

Portland journalist was interviewing an expert with some knowledge with what schools/markets have potential value to a conference. The expert kind of dodged the question for a while until the journalist pressed.

He gave Oregon about $30M/year value to the B1G. Then posed Stanford at about $45M of same. Much larger market, school with obvious academic reputation, and while their football comes and goes, there are several year-in year-out NC caliber programs. This Duck has no problem with that valuation. While Stanford isn’t quite the same makeup as Berkeley (my wife laughs at any mention of Stanford as “liberal”), however, they can very much employ out-of-box thinking and could chart their own path. But should probably accept a rumored B1G invite.

I would argue about the article comparing Portland as a market to Baltimore, Milwaukee, and Indianapolis, because it’s a larger metro by all measures, and still growing substantially. Rural populations are where things even out a bit… just a nitpick there.

One buzz going around this afternoon is that Notre Dame rejected the B1G again. Mind you, we were probably at the end of a cycle June 30, so it could be a while before the next steps play out.

It looks likely that there will evolve to be four Power Conferences, with the questions: What becomes the overall membership numbers per conference? Will there be any kind of trading between conferences? Does any PAC 12 or Big 12 schools get left out?

The PAC 12 and the Big 12 sure seem immersed in a lot of talk. One has lost two powerhouses and so has the other (or soon will.) Jammed together now forms a super conference of sort but without its big cannons. I wonder if this is really the move ahead???

(07-06-2022 02:33 PM)RCI Wrote:  The PAC 12 and the Big 12 sure seem immersed in a lot of talk. One has lost two powerhouses and so has the other (or soon will.) Jammed together now forms a super conference of sort but without its big cannons. I wonder if this is really the move ahead???

Personally, I don't think a lot of the recent moves make the schools moving better off than they were except in media revenues, which unfortunately is more important to them at this point than history or fan bases. I understand if you don't have a relatively level financial basis it becomes harder to recruit but overall these media deals probably aren't in the overall best interest of college athletics. Even a 16-20 team Big12/Pac12 combo will probably be worth significantly less in media rights than the SEC in football but may be worth more in the other sports. Competitively, will those schools moving to the SEC or Big Ten continue to be at the top of will the additional competition hurt their overall reputation.

(07-05-2022 11:28 AM)RCI Wrote:  This has been up on the net a while:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/big-te...02594dd6ba

Not a very well thought out article. Kansas is one of the top 5 picks for the PAC12? Remember when the Big 12 almost disbanded a few years ago? All the schools had a landing spot except for Kansas. I don't care how good you are at basketball, and Kansas is one of the 2-3 best, this is all about football. Kansas is not on anyone's shortlist.

And the writer really thinks Missouri, or any school for that matter, would leave the SEC for anyone else? Give me a break. The SEC is in total control of everything.