bryanw1995
+12 Hackmaster
Posts: 13,278
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 1370
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
|
RE: Realistic options for Pac-12 going forward.
(01-11-2023 12:57 AM)Alanda Wrote: (01-10-2023 09:39 PM)Milwaukee Wrote: (01-10-2023 09:07 PM)Alanda Wrote: (01-09-2023 11:51 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote: (01-09-2023 09:11 PM)Alanda Wrote: I think it's going to be SDSU and SMU. I just wonder if they go for four instead of two.
I've been wondering the same. It's a move that would mimic the B12, the only difference is the P12 would become the P14. SDSU, UNLV, SMU, Tulane
Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app
(01-10-2023 03:51 AM)Skyhawk Wrote: (01-09-2023 09:11 PM)Alanda Wrote: I think it's going to be SDSU and SMU. I just wonder if they go for four instead of two.
I think you may very well be right about more than 2.
It occurred to me earlier today to look at the conference if one of the 3 top targets was gone. ie looking at the PAC without WA, or instead without Stanford.
Changes the "feel" of the conference a bit.
So if at least 1 or 2 schools are likely leaving, adding 3 or 4 seems smart.
Add SDSU, Fresno state, UNLV, and BSU.
If all 3 (WA, OR, Stanford) leave, also try for BYU.
Let's presume Colorado also leaves, and add Gonzaga and Hawaii.
That package is a nice regional conference, which should be enough to get a decent media deal.
PAC
WSU, OSU, BSU, BYU, Utah, Gonzaga / Hawaii
Cal, Fresno state, SDSU, AZ, AZ state, UNLV
In response to both of you it does feel like that's been the direction some of these conferences have been going for the sake of backfilling. Big 12 lost two, added four. AAC lost three, added six. Obviously that doesn't confirm they will add four, but right now I'm starting to think four is more likely than zero. And like you mention Skyhawk it could help them in having some preparation for more teams leaving.
Agree, the PAC should add four (SDSU, Fresno, 2 others (Boise & Utah St?).
If four does happen my guess would be in order:
1. SDSU
2. SMU
3. Fresno State/UNLV
5. Gonzaga
6. Boise State
I put those two as a tie for third because while Fresno State's football is way better than UNLV's, UNLV is already R1 and Las Vegas continues to grow rather fast. Obviously more than that would go into determining what schools to add, but that's a quick summary for my view. The ones that are R2 maybe expected to focus on reaching R1. If I read other posts correctly there have been or will be changes that help California State Universities in that regard.
(01-11-2023 12:00 AM)Sicembear11 Wrote: SMU’s main challenge is that they don’t really draw and audience or carry their market. SMU has some regional interest but would people across Texas, or even Dallas, start tuning in more because SMU is play Arizona/Colorado/etc? Probably not. The PAC will have a hard time grabbing CST eyeballs with JUST SMU. The PAC would need to grab more Eastern teams to create interest.
Not to mention that going to 12 cuts down on the number of opportunities that teams have to play Oregon and Washington. In a 10 team setup, everyone plays everybody every year. Adding SDSU and SMU would mean dropping a game a year against either Oregon or Washington.
Finally, there is the issue of ego, which seems to make all the Big 12 teams untouchables as of last year, but somehow SMU is immune? They aren’t even an R1 university. A small school in Dallas, without the academic credentials that were used to reject a number of Big 12 programs, without an active following, with little support from the local area, far from the core of the PAC 12, and without any historical or cultural ties to the PAC.
I think SMU works well as a #2, I would pick them myself. But there is some hypocrisy going on if SMU is passing muster in 2023 when Baylor and others were not in 2021. I think the PAC staying at 10 makes more sense, I could even see going to 11 and holding firm as a viable path if SoCal is important.
With the last part I think the difference is USC being out of the way. We saw that USC was the driver against expansion and then ended up leaving themselves. How would things have turned out if USCLA and OUT announced they were leaving around the same time? Would the remaining PAC teams be more willing to add some Big 12 teams? Would there be a full-on merger? I think things would be different compared to how they are now.
There would be an 18 team big/pac right now, but without the 4 g5 schools the big 12 added.
Here's a more interesting hypothetical: what if USCLA leaves a year before OUT? How much more appealing is the big 12 to the Pac with OUT still in? I'm not sure that USCLA wouldn't have spurred OUT to also consider leaving, but if they had their pick of the juiciest Pac schools, say the PN4, I could see OUT sticking around for another cycle. Maybe bring back CU and get ASU, too, for a really strong 18 team big 12. What does that conference get in average media rights negotiations? I'd guess $55-65m, probably about the same as the SEC without OUT.
|
|