(08-01-2022 03:26 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 03:17 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 02:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 02:41 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 02:39 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Actually, I'm quite surprised that Gonzaga's research was that high considering its size. On a per capita basis considering its size, it's actually the best out of that entire group except for Colorado State. (Note that this is how the AAU evaluates research figures as opposed to sheer total dollars. It rightfully accounts for the different sizes of institutions.) Gonzaga is already clearly the highest for all of them for undergrad in the US News rankings. It's also the most notable sports brand (albeit not for football).

On the flip side, that UNLV figure is shockingly low to me considering it's directly in a major metro area and has a medical school.

Those are the budget numbers Frank not the research numbers.

Gonzaga does basically no research at all.

Ok - that makes more sense.

Still, even in the purview of operating budget, Gonzaga's number would be higher than everyone other than Colorado State taking into account its size, whereas UNLV and Fresno State have barely any budget by comparison.

Honestly, I think Gonzaga or a school like, say, SMU is less of a harder sell on an academic basis to the current Pac-12 than anyone here other than San Diego State (and even there, the academics might still be an issue, but it's a triage situation where the league MUST have a presence in Southern California).

Because Gonzaga is a private school Frank? Gonzaga's budget is significant enough where I could see them in the MWC but its not a PAC level addition.

While we are at it the research numbers for the above group.

65. Colorado State 407.3 million
91. Hawaii 275.9 million
162. UNLV 105.9 million
165. SDSU 97.7 million
214. Boise St 43.3 million
216. SMU 43.1 million
352. Fresno 8.9 million
754. Gonzaga 0.5 million

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site?...ce&ds=herd

Gonzaga only does 500k in research. Boston College by comparison is ranked 186 and does $63 million. Historically BC is a Top 40-60 school. Gonzaga historically a regional mid tier private. I just don't see a PAC level profile and they don't bring a market either.

SMU is plenty regarded to be in the PAC. Boise State would be marginal but is on the way up just like when the PAC brought in Arizona St forty years ago.

Believe me - I get the Pac-12's standards up to this point. They essentially have had the same standards as the Big Ten for expansion. The problem, of course, is that there aren't any other Big Ten-like schools in the Western half of the US and the Big Ten itself has openly entered its territory.

To be sure, I don't think Gonzaga will get into the Pac-12 more on the basis that it doesn't play football. So, the academic discussion is almost a moot point. However, IF the Pac-12 wanted a non-football member, though, then there isn't any better basketball brand in the West outside of Gonzaga. We have to remember that losing UCLA was nearly as big of a blow to the Pac-12 for basketball in terms of brand value for that sport as losing USC was for football. If the Pac-12 is seriously looking at San Diego State, UNLV, etc., then I think the league is essentially looking past academic standards if the market and/or brand value is high enough.

That have watered down Big 10 and PAC 12 football and other sports big time. Since the BCS era to the playoffs, ACC and SEC produced the most schools in the championship game or playoffs with the SEC leading the way with ACC a distant second. Big East had 4, but those teams are now ACC property. AAC got one with Cincinnati. I f the playoffs expanded in 2005? WAC may have like 6 in the playoffs and MWC 6.

WAC:Hawaii, Boise State 4 and Fresno State 1.
MWC:Utah, TCU 3, Boise State 2
AAC had Cincinnati but they could had Houston and UCF if they were ranked higher.
MAC:Western Michigan and Northern Illinois 1 time each. If they go before that? Marshall would have been that while C-USA would have Louisville and Tulane.

(08-02-2022 07:06 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:55 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 02:32 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 02:25 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  You have to remember this is the PAC. They will be performing due academic diligence on all the candidates.

Aside from the research level the budget is very important.

Colorado State (1.5 billion)
Hawaii (1 billion)
SDSU (936.7 mil)-2018 number
Boise St (516 mil)-2018 number
UNLV (333.7 mil)
Fresno (286.5 mil)-2017 number
Gonzaga (269.5 mil)-2019 number.

The PAC could very well add Colorado State on the basis of academics alone.

Fresno is behind both Boise/UNLV in this discussion. They have bigger markets. UNLV with Las Vegas and Boise can claim the whole state of Idaho. They have bigger budgets and are legit mid tier research schools. They have bigger operating budget. Lastly but not least they aren't under the thumb of Cal and Stanford as in state CSU schools all are.

If Boise & SDSU have been the top AAC candidates for a decade and near the top of the list for XII I don't see how Fresno has leapfrogged them for a PAC invite.

If the PAC doesn't think Boise's academics cut it you'll see something like Colorado St or Hawaii as an alternative. You won't see UNLV and Fresno ahead of Boise for academic reasons.

Gonzaga is flat out not a PAC level institution. They would be ok for the MWC or G5 league.

Kliavkoff said this was the criteria for expansion in this order:

1. Media Market (Houston, TCU, UNLV, SDSU, SMU)
2. Athletic Success (Houston, TCU, SDSU, Boise St)
3. Academic/Cultural Fit (Houston, Col St, UNLV)
4. Geography (SDSU, UNLV, BOISE ST, Col St)

Using that Criteria

1. SDSU
2. Houston
3. TCU
4. UNLV

How could Academic include Houston, Col St and UNLV - good schools, but far from great!
My recommendation:

1) SDSU
2) SMU
3) Boise State (the academic exception!)
4) Air Force (football) / Gonzaga (all other sports)

Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

(08-02-2022 09:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 07:06 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:55 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 02:32 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 02:25 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  You have to remember this is the PAC. They will be performing due academic diligence on all the candidates.

Aside from the research level the budget is very important.

Colorado State (1.5 billion)
Hawaii (1 billion)
SDSU (936.7 mil)-2018 number
Boise St (516 mil)-2018 number
UNLV (333.7 mil)
Fresno (286.5 mil)-2017 number
Gonzaga (269.5 mil)-2019 number.

The PAC could very well add Colorado State on the basis of academics alone.

Fresno is behind both Boise/UNLV in this discussion. They have bigger markets. UNLV with Las Vegas and Boise can claim the whole state of Idaho. They have bigger budgets and are legit mid tier research schools. They have bigger operating budget. Lastly but not least they aren't under the thumb of Cal and Stanford as in state CSU schools all are.

If Boise & SDSU have been the top AAC candidates for a decade and near the top of the list for XII I don't see how Fresno has leapfrogged them for a PAC invite.

If the PAC doesn't think Boise's academics cut it you'll see something like Colorado St or Hawaii as an alternative. You won't see UNLV and Fresno ahead of Boise for academic reasons.

Gonzaga is flat out not a PAC level institution. They would be ok for the MWC or G5 league.

Kliavkoff said this was the criteria for expansion in this order:

1. Media Market (Houston, TCU, UNLV, SDSU, SMU)
2. Athletic Success (Houston, TCU, SDSU, Boise St)
3. Academic/Cultural Fit (Houston, Col St, UNLV)
4. Geography (SDSU, UNLV, BOISE ST, Col St)

Using that Criteria

1. SDSU
2. Houston
3. TCU
4. UNLV

How could Academic include Houston, Col St and UNLV - good schools, but far from great!
My recommendation:

1) SDSU
2) SMU
3) Boise State (the academic exception!)
4) Air Force (football) / Gonzaga (all other sports)

Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

The Pac is going to have to relax a bit on the research issue, they are not currently working from a position of stregnth - on the edge of collapse? SMU is in the 5th largest TV market and projected to be 3rd within 7/10 years; SMU is the school of Doak Walker and many other greats - football record for the last 3 years is 25-10 (the most wins of any TX. university over that same period! Academicly SMU is ranked 68 (US News 2022) - #3 in Texas behind Rice and Texas. SMU's endowment is in the area of $2 Billion and finally Geographically SMU sits in the #1 hotbed of recruiting for football. Recent recruiting class was ranked 50 out of 130 and Transfer Portal ranking was 13 out of 130 - great players leave, but then want to get back to DFW!

(08-02-2022 09:42 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 07:06 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:55 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(08-01-2022 02:32 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  Kliavkoff said this was the criteria for expansion in this order:

1. Media Market (Houston, TCU, UNLV, SDSU, SMU)
2. Athletic Success (Houston, TCU, SDSU, Boise St)
3. Academic/Cultural Fit (Houston, Col St, UNLV)
4. Geography (SDSU, UNLV, BOISE ST, Col St)

Using that Criteria

1. SDSU
2. Houston
3. TCU
4. UNLV

How could Academic include Houston, Col St and UNLV - good schools, but far from great!
My recommendation:

1) SDSU
2) SMU
3) Boise State (the academic exception!)
4) Air Force (football) / Gonzaga (all other sports)

Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

The Pac is going to have to relax a bit on the research issue, they are not currently working from a position of stregnth - on the edge of collapse? SMU is in the 5th largest TV market and projected to be 3rd within 7/10 years; SMU is the school of Doak Walker and many other greats - football record for the last 3 years is 25-10 (the most wins of any TX. university over that same period! Academicly SMU is ranked 68 (US News 2022) - #3 in Texas behind Rice and Texas. SMU's endowment is in the area of $2 Billion and finally Geographically SMU sits in the #1 hotbed of recruiting for football. Recent recruiting class was ranked 50 out of 130 and Transfer Portal ranking was 13 out of 130 - great players leave, but then want to get back to DFW!

Problem is, SMU only brings 1 of 4 criteria that Kliavkoff mentioned. And realistically, how much of the DFW market does SMU actually draw? Based on attendance, it doesn’t appear that much.

The Pac-12’s fate will be decided by the B1G, and expanding with one or more MWC schools will do nothing to prevent the B1G from poaching more Pac-12 members if it chooses. At the same time, expanding could make the Pac-12 less desirable to members being courted by the Big 12, since any MWC addition has the potential to dilute per-member payouts and/or make the conference appear less competitive in football.

Under the circumstances it’s hard to see a compelling motivation for the Pac-12 to immediately “relax a bit on the research issue” and pull the trigger on additions from the MWC. Maybe there will be better reasons to do so in a month or a year, but at this moment I see any expansion with MWC schools potentially being more destabilizing than stabilizing.

(08-02-2022 10:07 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The Pac-12’s fate will be decided by the B1G, and expanding with one or more MWC schools will do nothing to prevent the B1G from poaching more Pac-12 members if it chooses. At the same time, expanding could make the Pac-12 less desirable to members being courted by the Big 12, since any MWC addition has the potential to dilute per-member payouts and/or make the conference appear less competitive in football.

Under the circumstances it’s hard to see a compelling motivation for the Pac-12 to immediately “relax a bit on the research issue” and pull the trigger on additions from the MWC. Maybe there will be better reasons to do so in a month or a year, but at this moment I see any expansion with MWC schools potentially being more destabilizing than stabilizing.

I don't see them expanding. They don't need 12 for a ccg. So the only reason to expand would be markets, ie Southern California. UNLV is just too bad. And CSU has been bad at football and draws no interest. I think if they do, its SDSU and SMU.

(08-02-2022 10:02 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:42 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 07:06 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:55 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  Using that Criteria

1. SDSU
2. Houston
3. TCU
4. UNLV

How could Academic include Houston, Col St and UNLV - good schools, but far from great!
My recommendation:

1) SDSU
2) SMU
3) Boise State (the academic exception!)
4) Air Force (football) / Gonzaga (all other sports)

Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

The Pac is going to have to relax a bit on the research issue, they are not currently working from a position of stregnth - on the edge of collapse? SMU is in the 5th largest TV market and projected to be 3rd within 7/10 years; SMU is the school of Doak Walker and many other greats - football record for the last 3 years is 25-10 (the most wins of any TX. university over that same period! Academicly SMU is ranked 68 (US News 2022) - #3 in Texas behind Rice and Texas. SMU's endowment is in the area of $2 Billion and finally Geographically SMU sits in the #1 hotbed of recruiting for football. Recent recruiting class was ranked 50 out of 130 and Transfer Portal ranking was 13 out of 130 - great players leave, but then want to get back to DFW!

Problem is, SMU only brings 1 of 4 criteria that Kliavkoff mentioned. And realistically, how much of the DFW market does SMU actually draw? Based on attendance, it doesn’t appear that much.

All these are ahead of SMU in DFW:

Texas
Oklahoma
Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU
Texas A&M

(08-02-2022 10:07 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The Pac-12’s fate will be decided by the B1G, and expanding with one or more MWC schools will do nothing to prevent the B1G from poaching more Pac-12 members if it chooses. At the same time, expanding could make the Pac-12 less desirable to members being courted by the Big 12, since any MWC addition has the potential to dilute per-member payouts and/or make the conference appear less competitive in football.

Under the circumstances it’s hard to see a compelling motivation for the Pac-12 to immediately “relax a bit on the research issue” and pull the trigger on additions from the MWC. Maybe there will be better reasons to do so in a month or a year, but at this moment I see any expansion with MWC schools potentially being more destabilizing than stabilizing.

Great points. I could see SDSU as the one exception since they are a great fit for the PAC, otherwise, all other G5s fail to fit the bill at this point, and possibly ever if the PAC ends up staying at 10 or 11.

(08-02-2022 10:02 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:42 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 07:06 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:55 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  Using that Criteria

1. SDSU
2. Houston
3. TCU
4. UNLV

How could Academic include Houston, Col St and UNLV - good schools, but far from great!
My recommendation:

1) SDSU
2) SMU
3) Boise State (the academic exception!)
4) Air Force (football) / Gonzaga (all other sports)

Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

The Pac is going to have to relax a bit on the research issue, they are not currently working from a position of stregnth - on the edge of collapse? SMU is in the 5th largest TV market and projected to be 3rd within 7/10 years; SMU is the school of Doak Walker and many other greats - football record for the last 3 years is 25-10 (the most wins of any TX. university over that same period! Academicly SMU is ranked 68 (US News 2022) - #3 in Texas behind Rice and Texas. SMU's endowment is in the area of $2 Billion and finally Geographically SMU sits in the #1 hotbed of recruiting for football. Recent recruiting class was ranked 50 out of 130 and Transfer Portal ranking was 13 out of 130 - great players leave, but then want to get back to DFW!

Problem is, SMU only brings 1 of 4 criteria that Kliavkoff mentioned. And realistically, how much of the DFW market does SMU actually draw? Based on attendance, it doesn’t appear that much.

I think they are an academic but not cultural fit.
They do provide an excellent location (but not market) for the PAC though.
They have moderate athletic success, in these days and age Pony Express would be legal so I would give them that.


So in summation, i think the geography, academics, and athletic success is in their favor.
Market and culture might be sticking points.

If the PAC isn't reaching into the B12 and has to expand- I think SMU is the 1st or 2nd call.

(08-02-2022 10:10 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 10:07 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The Pac-12’s fate will be decided by the B1G, and expanding with one or more MWC schools will do nothing to prevent the B1G from poaching more Pac-12 members if it chooses. At the same time, expanding could make the Pac-12 less desirable to members being courted by the Big 12, since any MWC addition has the potential to dilute per-member payouts and/or make the conference appear less competitive in football.

Under the circumstances it’s hard to see a compelling motivation for the Pac-12 to immediately “relax a bit on the research issue” and pull the trigger on additions from the MWC. Maybe there will be better reasons to do so in a month or a year, but at this moment I see any expansion with MWC schools potentially being more destabilizing than stabilizing.

I don't see them expanding. They don't need 12 for a ccg. So the only reason to expand would be markets, ie Southern California. UNLV is just too bad. And CSU has been bad at football and draws no interest. I think if they do, its SDSU and SMU.

I agree with this conclusion, although I feel that it's more likely than not that the Pac-12 expands. They could get SDSU and SMU to take lower revenue shares and those schools would still be way better off compared to the MWC and AAC, respectively. I'm generally not an "expand for the sake of expanding" person at all, but with the sheer number of Pac-12 schools that are *potentially* Big Ten targets and the Four Corners schools having the Big 12 as a viable backup plan, the Pac-12 feels like a Jenga tower if it stays at 10 schools where any single school leaving could cause the whole thing to crash down.

Agree Frank. If they don't expand, they are just too vulnerable.

And with expansion, there is new energy, new schools, new everything. Seems like they need some excitement. The B12 really gained energy and capitalized on their additions last year...don't know why the PAC wouldn't be any different. Even if it is MWC schools or SMU.

Kinda like buying a new car....you struggle for a long time about spending the money, but after you take the plunge...you don't really think about the money anymore, you just think about how excited you are of that new car smell and newness. Ha Ha.

(08-02-2022 10:24 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I agree with this conclusion, although I feel that it's more likely than not that the Pac-12 expands. They could get SDSU and SMU to take lower revenue shares and those schools would still be way better off compared to the MWC and AAC, respectively. I'm generally not an "expand for the sake of expanding" person at all, but with the sheer number of Pac-12 schools that are *potentially* Big Ten targets and the Four Corners schools having the Big 12 as a viable backup plan, the Pac-12 feels like a Jenga tower if it stays at 10 schools where any single school leaving could cause the whole thing to crash down.

That's a good analogy Frank.

I think they will stay together too and expand because they will all make more money that way, and the Big 12 will always be there

(08-02-2022 10:17 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 10:07 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The Pac-12’s fate will be decided by the B1G, and expanding with one or more MWC schools will do nothing to prevent the B1G from poaching more Pac-12 members if it chooses. At the same time, expanding could make the Pac-12 less desirable to members being courted by the Big 12, since any MWC addition has the potential to dilute per-member payouts and/or make the conference appear less competitive in football.

Under the circumstances it’s hard to see a compelling motivation for the Pac-12 to immediately “relax a bit on the research issue” and pull the trigger on additions from the MWC. Maybe there will be better reasons to do so in a month or a year, but at this moment I see any expansion with MWC schools potentially being more destabilizing than stabilizing.

Great points. I could see SDSU as the one exception since they are a great fit for the PAC, otherwise, all other G5s fail to fit the bill at this point, and possibly ever if the PAC ends up staying at 10 or 11.

Agreed that if there’s any exception it’s SDSU, but only if there’s a strong push from multiple conference members to plant a flag back in SoCal. SDSU doesn’t deliver a meaningful share of the Los Angeles market (which is distinct from and four times larger than the San Diego market), and technically doesn’t fit the current Pac-12 institutionally as it isn’t a state flagship, land grant, or R1 school.

(08-02-2022 10:07 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The Pac-12’s fate will be decided by the B1G, and expanding with one or more MWC schools will do nothing to prevent the B1G from poaching more Pac-12 members if it chooses. At the same time, expanding could make the Pac-12 less desirable to members being courted by the Big 12, since any MWC addition has the potential to dilute per-member payouts and/or make the conference appear less competitive in football.

Under the circumstances it’s hard to see a compelling motivation for the Pac-12 to immediately “relax a bit on the research issue” and pull the trigger on additions from the MWC. Maybe there will be better reasons to do so in a month or a year, but at this moment I see any expansion with MWC schools potentially being more destabilizing than stabilizing.

PAC 12 is already competitive towards Boise State, Fresno State and San Diego State. Those three schools do bring excitement and the competitive spirit to the PAC 12 teams. If anybody remembers the Boise State's upset win over Oregon at Oregon? An Oregon player started throwing punches at a Boise State player after the game, and a schuffle started. Boise State is already a rival with Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State and adding them to the PAC 12 will help them recruit better since they have beaten BYU last year, and almost won games over UCF and Oklahoma State last year. All three will be the future Big 12 lineup.

(08-02-2022 10:02 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:42 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 07:06 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 06:55 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  Using that Criteria

1. SDSU
2. Houston
3. TCU
4. UNLV

How could Academic include Houston, Col St and UNLV - good schools, but far from great!
My recommendation:

1) SDSU
2) SMU
3) Boise State (the academic exception!)
4) Air Force (football) / Gonzaga (all other sports)

Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

The Pac is going to have to relax a bit on the research issue, they are not currently working from a position of stregnth - on the edge of collapse? SMU is in the 5th largest TV market and projected to be 3rd within 7/10 years; SMU is the school of Doak Walker and many other greats - football record for the last 3 years is 25-10 (the most wins of any TX. university over that same period! Academicly SMU is ranked 68 (US News 2022) - #3 in Texas behind Rice and Texas. SMU's endowment is in the area of $2 Billion and finally Geographically SMU sits in the #1 hotbed of recruiting for football. Recent recruiting class was ranked 50 out of 130 and Transfer Portal ranking was 13 out of 130 - great players leave, but then want to get back to DFW!

Problem is, SMU only brings 1 of 4 criteria that Kliavkoff mentioned. And realistically, how much of the DFW market does SMU actually draw? Based on attendance, it doesn’t appear that much.

They have the academics, they have the market, they have decent athletic success (have been consistently a top 25 football team in the last few years, not bad at basketball), and even cultural fit shouldn't be much of an issue. The school is NOT religious and they draw heavily from California for much of the student body.

The biggest knock on SMU is that they have a small student body and alumni base which means historically the school struggles to consistently draw numbers. They've done better in recent years with better marketing though.

(08-02-2022 10:42 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 10:17 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 10:07 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  The Pac-12’s fate will be decided by the B1G, and expanding with one or more MWC schools will do nothing to prevent the B1G from poaching more Pac-12 members if it chooses. At the same time, expanding could make the Pac-12 less desirable to members being courted by the Big 12, since any MWC addition has the potential to dilute per-member payouts and/or make the conference appear less competitive in football.

Under the circumstances it’s hard to see a compelling motivation for the Pac-12 to immediately “relax a bit on the research issue” and pull the trigger on additions from the MWC. Maybe there will be better reasons to do so in a month or a year, but at this moment I see any expansion with MWC schools potentially being more destabilizing than stabilizing.

Great points. I could see SDSU as the one exception since they are a great fit for the PAC, otherwise, all other G5s fail to fit the bill at this point, and possibly ever if the PAC ends up staying at 10 or 11.

Agreed that if there’s any exception it’s SDSU, but only if there’s a strong push from multiple conference members to plant a flag back in SoCal. SDSU doesn’t deliver a meaningful share of the Los Angeles market (which is distinct from and four times larger than the San Diego market), and technically doesn’t fit the current Pac-12 institutionally as it isn’t a state flagship, land grant, or R1 school.

We will be R1 by 2025.

(08-02-2022 11:20 AM)Comet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 10:02 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:42 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 07:06 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  How could Academic include Houston, Col St and UNLV - good schools, but far from great!
My recommendation:

1) SDSU
2) SMU
3) Boise State (the academic exception!)
4) Air Force (football) / Gonzaga (all other sports)

Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

The Pac is going to have to relax a bit on the research issue, they are not currently working from a position of stregnth - on the edge of collapse? SMU is in the 5th largest TV market and projected to be 3rd within 7/10 years; SMU is the school of Doak Walker and many other greats - football record for the last 3 years is 25-10 (the most wins of any TX. university over that same period! Academicly SMU is ranked 68 (US News 2022) - #3 in Texas behind Rice and Texas. SMU's endowment is in the area of $2 Billion and finally Geographically SMU sits in the #1 hotbed of recruiting for football. Recent recruiting class was ranked 50 out of 130 and Transfer Portal ranking was 13 out of 130 - great players leave, but then want to get back to DFW!

Problem is, SMU only brings 1 of 4 criteria that Kliavkoff mentioned. And realistically, how much of the DFW market does SMU actually draw? Based on attendance, it doesn’t appear that much.

They have the academics, they have the market, they have decent athletic success (have been consistently a top 25 football team in the last few years, not bad at basketball), and even cultural fit shouldn't be much of an issue. The school is NOT religious and they draw heavily from California for much of the student body.

The biggest knock on SMU is that they have a small student body and alumni base which means historically the school struggles to consistently draw numbers. They've done better in recent years with better marketing though.

One issue with SMU is that you will be at a distinct disadvantage with travel.

(08-02-2022 11:27 AM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 11:20 AM)Comet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 10:02 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:42 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

The Pac is going to have to relax a bit on the research issue, they are not currently working from a position of stregnth - on the edge of collapse? SMU is in the 5th largest TV market and projected to be 3rd within 7/10 years; SMU is the school of Doak Walker and many other greats - football record for the last 3 years is 25-10 (the most wins of any TX. university over that same period! Academicly SMU is ranked 68 (US News 2022) - #3 in Texas behind Rice and Texas. SMU's endowment is in the area of $2 Billion and finally Geographically SMU sits in the #1 hotbed of recruiting for football. Recent recruiting class was ranked 50 out of 130 and Transfer Portal ranking was 13 out of 130 - great players leave, but then want to get back to DFW!

Problem is, SMU only brings 1 of 4 criteria that Kliavkoff mentioned. And realistically, how much of the DFW market does SMU actually draw? Based on attendance, it doesn’t appear that much.

They have the academics, they have the market, they have decent athletic success (have been consistently a top 25 football team in the last few years, not bad at basketball), and even cultural fit shouldn't be much of an issue. The school is NOT religious and they draw heavily from California for much of the student body.

The biggest knock on SMU is that they have a small student body and alumni base which means historically the school struggles to consistently draw numbers. They've done better in recent years with better marketing though.

One issue with SMU is that you will be at a distinct disadvantage with travel.

Similar to when TCU was in the MWC.

(08-02-2022 11:20 AM)Comet Wrote:  they have decent athletic success (have been consistently a top 25 football team in the last few years, not bad at basketball),

Are you sure about that?

8-4
7-3
10-3
5-7
7-6
5-7
(couple of 8-5 seasons as good as it gets between this and 1984)

I guess they got ranked at some point the last couple of seasons, but I don't think they finished there.

Maybe "consistently got ranked in the top 25 at some point during the season for the last 3 years" instead?

(08-02-2022 11:27 AM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 11:20 AM)Comet Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 10:02 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:42 AM)Big Foote Wrote:  

(08-02-2022 09:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  Houston and Colorado St. have a lot of research and good grad schools, so they are much more like the Pac schools than the 4 you listed above.

The Pac is going to have to relax a bit on the research issue, they are not currently working from a position of stregnth - on the edge of collapse? SMU is in the 5th largest TV market and projected to be 3rd within 7/10 years; SMU is the school of Doak Walker and many other greats - football record for the last 3 years is 25-10 (the most wins of any TX. university over that same period! Academicly SMU is ranked 68 (US News 2022) - #3 in Texas behind Rice and Texas. SMU's endowment is in the area of $2 Billion and finally Geographically SMU sits in the #1 hotbed of recruiting for football. Recent recruiting class was ranked 50 out of 130 and Transfer Portal ranking was 13 out of 130 - great players leave, but then want to get back to DFW!

Problem is, SMU only brings 1 of 4 criteria that Kliavkoff mentioned. And realistically, how much of the DFW market does SMU actually draw? Based on attendance, it doesn’t appear that much.

They have the academics, they have the market, they have decent athletic success (have been consistently a top 25 football team in the last few years, not bad at basketball), and even cultural fit shouldn't be much of an issue. The school is NOT religious and they draw heavily from California for much of the student body.

The biggest knock on SMU is that they have a small student body and alumni base which means historically the school struggles to consistently draw numbers. They've done better in recent years with better marketing though.

One issue with SMU is that you will be at a distinct disadvantage with travel.

by todays P% conference standards we are a short commute - the country isa getting much smaller!