(01-08-2023 10:02 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  ....
The PAC isn't adding SMU - or anyone else east of the rockies - unless they are part of a group of schools, ie. a whole division.
....

My sense of it as well. I'd add this possibility, which is not necessarily a different play: The PAC adds schools in Texas, Oklahoma or Kansas with the intention of bridging the space with additions from MWC and Sun Belt.

(01-08-2023 10:22 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 10:20 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  I voted for SDSU, SMU, and Gonzaga. But I think the SMU invite will be for "football only." The Pac-12 needs Gonzaga for basketball and Olympic sports, to help replace UCLA. They need SMU for football. In basketball, Gonzaga has a net ranking of 12, SDSU has a net ranking of 23 and SMU has a net ranking of 204. SMU will help in football, but not much for the Olympic sports and they add to the travel for Olympic sports.

So WAC for our other sports?

I have no idea. Maybe. But SMU as a power conference school in football is a big first step in the right direction.

Tulane football only and Zaga would be interesting, not that they'd be able to pull it off. Tulane drops to ASUN or A10 for BBall, I don't know honestly.

San Diego St and SMU. As a Zags fan, I don’t want to see us join a conference that is so up in the air. I do want the PAC to survive and this pair is the best of all non-power schools.

(01-08-2023 07:08 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  I think the most likely scenario is the PAC offers Tulane and offers Houston the support for AAU membership to join them. Tulane is AAU already.

I actually laughed when I read this. I mean, I get it though, why bother with a SoCal school when you can go to New Orleans for a program with very little support and no history of success. And UH is already out of the Pac's reach, they've been trying to get into the big 12 for 25 years and aren't going to fumble that away at the 1 yd line.

(01-08-2023 10:04 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 10:02 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I've read/watched/listened to the punditry regurgitate this, but sorry, no -

The PAC isn't adding SMU - or anyone else east of the rockies - unless they are part of a group of schools, ie. a whole division.

And that would likely involve a B12 raid. Which, I think, at this point is unlikely.

You should be in LA witnessing who is meeting whom right now….

I could make a case for SMU/UTSA/Memphis/SDSU right now to the Pac (Memphis is nearly the same travel time from Dallas as SA), but I think that the SDSU/SMU/Gonzaga adds is the most likely fit for now. They can always circle back and add UTSA and Memphis when UW/UO leave, and I can absolutely imagine a scenario where all of that happens and nobody ends up leaving the Pac for the big 12.

Keeping it simple: add two or add zero.

Since USCLA are leaving I think they'll opt with the remaining members trying to do better in basketball. Gonzaga is better off in the Big 12 and playing the likes of BYU, Kansas, Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma State and Cincinnati.

Trying to do football-only memberships screams minor league. The PAC won't do that.

By the way, I just watched a video from someone who claims to have people in the western states and he's thinking that San Diego State and UNLV as a combo is getting the most steam.





Start at 3:18

According to him the candidates they're looking at are:

Fresno State
San Diego State
SMU
Hawaii
Colorado State
UNLV
Rice
Boise State

Hawaii with Zaga although if that's not a possibility, I could see why they'd take UNLV over FSU. Doesn't appear Texas is a high priority at the moment from that "west coast" guy, but perhaps in the second wave, SMU/Rice could get traction.

If it's 25 million, half shares is more than reasonable with a six year GoR.

I think to get to the 30-35M they want they have to expand as they have been told that at 10 they are worth 20-24M per school without USC/UCLA.

(01-08-2023 10:20 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  I voted for SDSU, SMU, and Gonzaga. But I think the SMU invite will be for "football only." The Pac-12 needs Gonzaga for basketball and Olympic sports, to help replace UCLA. They need SMU for football. In basketball, Gonzaga has a net ranking of 12, SDSU has a net ranking of 23 and SMU has a net ranking of 204. SMU will help in football, but not much for the Olympic sports and they add to the travel for Olympic sports.

SMU would not accept a football only invitation.

(01-09-2023 07:16 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  I think to get to the 30-35M they want they have to expand as they have been told that at 10 they are worth 20-24M per school without USC/UCLA.

I just cannot see how adding 2 G5 teams increases the contract by $144 million a year. So we are saying each G5 schools adds overall $72 million a year.

How did I get to those numbers, well we know what they were offered prior to potential expansion at let's say $24 million each. In order to get to Big 12 numbers at $32 million each, that $8 million more per team that they have to get, plus another 2 new G5 teams at $32 million each.

Obviously we are using numbers that don't included any Amazon offer, to that's the wild card....... but Linear TV, they are done and screwed.

With deregulation, could have a 10-team football-only division. Couple with a 4-team conference football championship playoff.

Who would the 10 football onlys be?

The PAC needs content to sell to both Amazon and ESPN so in my mind adding SDSU and SMU is the most likely.

I'd argue the PAC should add Tulane and Rice as well

(01-09-2023 07:57 AM)CFBLurker Wrote:  The PAC needs content to sell to both Amazon and ESPN so in my mind adding SDSU and SMU is the most likely.

I'd argue the PAC should add Tulane and Rice as well

I Agree - SDSU, SMU, Tulane and 1 of - Rice/Memphis/UTSA. This group is going to take a recuced share for 4 to 6 years. You cannot just worry about $'s for each team in the short run or you will wake up and there will not be a PAC 12. The big 12 is adding 4 and that plan seems to be working out!

(01-09-2023 12:00 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 07:08 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  I think the most likely scenario is the PAC offers Tulane and offers Houston the support for AAU membership to join them. Tulane is AAU already.

I actually laughed when I read this. I mean, I get it though, why bother with a SoCal school when you can go to New Orleans for a program with very little support and no history of success. And UH is already out of the Pac's reach, they've been trying to get into the big 12 for 25 years and aren't going to fumble that away at the 1 yd line.

Esp when they have 3 Tx schools and 1 OK school to play. B12 is the perfect landing spot for UH.

(01-09-2023 09:50 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 12:00 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-08-2023 07:08 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  I think the most likely scenario is the PAC offers Tulane and offers Houston the support for AAU membership to join them. Tulane is AAU already.

I actually laughed when I read this. I mean, I get it though, why bother with a SoCal school when you can go to New Orleans for a program with very little support and no history of success. And UH is already out of the Pac's reach, they've been trying to get into the big 12 for 25 years and aren't going to fumble that away at the 1 yd line.

Esp when they have 3 Tx schools and 1 OK school to play. B12 is the perfect landing spot for UH.

The PAC has no chance of getting Houston.

Stay at 10.

But Real Talk. I would be walking with Oregon to B1G if there is a invite coming with stipulations.

All in. PAC 20. Destroy the Big 12 or bust. 9 of the future 12 to dissolve the Big 12.

Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Houston, Baylor, BYU, plus SDSU.


Or, complete merger with the Big 12. Add SDSU to the west side and Memphis, USF, or Tulane to the east side of the behemoth with four 6-team scheduling divisions:

WEST: Washington, Wazzu, Oregon, Oregon State, Cal, Stanford
MOUNTAIN: SDSU, Arizona, ASU, Utah, BYU, Colorado
NORTH: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Baylor
EAST: TCU, Houston, UCF, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Memphis/Tulane/USF

(01-08-2023 05:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  I agree that SDSU and SMU make the most sense, and both get the invite the day after the new deal is signed (coming in at ~ 1/2 shares for the new deal). Gonzaga has many reasons to prefer the Pac over the big 12, and the Pac is more anxious for good news now than the big 12, meaning they'll likely offer Gonzaga a better deal than the big 12 would. Add it all together, and you still get a big dropoff from USCLA, but perhaps not as crushing of a blow as we might have thought a few months ago.

I think this is plausible.

The 50% shares for the duration of the new deal makes sense and it would give a raise to the current PAC schools and give a bump for SMU/SDSU. I do wonder what happens at the end of the deal? SMU/SDSU won't accept being half a member in future deals.