Before the new media deal goes further than "intent" - what if the PAC invited Texas Tech and TCU?

(01-15-2023 03:47 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Before the new media deal goes further than "intent" - what if the PAC invited Texas Tech and TCU?

Geographically there's a good case to be made for the PAC contacting Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and the Kansas schools about anchoring the eastern edge of a new, more expansive PAC footprint.

The invitations would be declined.

What will the PAC 12 offer they can’t get from the Big 12?

(01-15-2023 11:49 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  The invitations would be declined.

I mean, what an offer: "We are offering you less money for worse travel and less exposure in the areas you are most concerned with!!!"

...when the Texahoma 4 deal fell thru, that probably killed any PAC poaching of the BIG XII... looks like SMU would be the best bet, although if I were an SMU fan, not sure if I would want to be on that island and not have regional games.

Aresco grabbed all of the C-USA Texas teams in the Central Time Zone to appease SMU, and of course to prevent the MWC from entering Texas...

Of course, it would be a BIG spike financially for the 'Stangs, so I figure they would jump...

(01-15-2023 10:48 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 03:47 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Before the new media deal goes further than "intent" - what if the PAC invited Texas Tech and TCU?

Geographically there's a good case to be made for the PAC contacting Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and the Kansas schools about anchoring the eastern edge of a new, more expansive PAC footprint.

I personally think Texas Tech & Kansas would be great for the Corner 4 at regaining relevancy & helping out on the coast at those teams getting better in football.

(01-15-2023 12:04 PM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  although if I were an SMU fan, not sure if I would want to be on that island and not have regional games.

Aresco grabbed all of the C-USA Texas teams in the Central Time Zone to appease SMU, and of course to prevent the MWC from entering Texas...

Of course, it would be a BIG spike financially for the 'Stangs, so I figure they would jump...

I can personally and one zillion percent guarantee you that we'd rather be "on that island" than share a conference with UNT, FAU and something called Charlotte

(01-15-2023 12:02 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 11:49 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  The invitations would be declined.

I mean, what an offer: "We are offering you less money for worse travel and less exposure in the areas you are most concerned with!!!"

My thought is that adding them should improve the money situation.

If SMU is considered a good option for the PAC, then surely these 2 are.

(01-15-2023 12:26 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 12:02 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 11:49 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  The invitations would be declined.

I mean, what an offer: "We are offering you less money for worse travel and less exposure in the areas you are most concerned with!!!"

My thought is that adding them should improve the money situation.

If SMU is considered a good option for the PAC, then surely these 2 are.

Yes, but the point is: Is the Pac a good option for them?

Why would TCU and Tech do this--- you think they would rather associate with Oregon State and Washington State than schools in Texas or Oklahoma? To play primarily on Apple TV?

(01-15-2023 12:29 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 12:26 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 12:02 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 11:49 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  The invitations would be declined.

I mean, what an offer: "We are offering you less money for worse travel and less exposure in the areas you are most concerned with!!!"

My thought is that adding them should improve the money situation.

If SMU is considered a good option for the PAC, then surely these 2 are.

Yes, but the point is: Is the Pac a good option for them?

That indeed is a very good question.

Let's look at the B12 without those 2 schools, and the PAC without those two schools. Which looks stronger/better?

And now look at each conference with them included. Again, which looks stronger/better?

So I agree, it's an interesting question to ask.

The PAC supposedly was considering inviting TCU and Houston shortly after Texas and OU announced they were joining the SEC. Texas Tech was never rumored to be under consideration.

(01-15-2023 12:19 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 12:04 PM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  although if I were an SMU fan, not sure if I would want to be on that island and not have regional games.

Aresco grabbed all of the C-USA Texas teams in the Central Time Zone to appease SMU, and of course to prevent the MWC from entering Texas...

Of course, it would be a BIG spike financially for the 'Stangs, so I figure they would jump...

I can personally and one zillion percent guarantee you that we'd rather be "on that island" than share a conference with UNT, FAU and something called Charlotte

...oh c'mon... it's not that bad, trust me...

...seriously, wish the best for y'all, as a 'historic' school from the old SWC days, I'm cool with y'all moving up - in the meantime, glad to be in conference with y'all, and hope that we can 'power up' to AAC level soon.

But I figure if the PAC comes calling, y'all are a lock, and they may well grab at least one more 'east of the Rockies' team (I think they might go with 4 adds total, with 2 west coast teams SDSU a 'lock', and either Boise or Fresno) - WHO, not sure... y'all's old SWC mate Rice also seems to be batted around, which I guess would be a bit of plus for y'all, logistically... other than that, Memphis or Tulane, maybe?

(01-15-2023 12:32 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Why would TCU and Tech do this--- you think they would rather associate with Oregon State and Washington State than schools in Texas or Oklahoma? To play primarily on Apple TV?

It has nothing to do with that, but rather:

1. Better stability: nobody is poaching big 12 teams now, and perhaps ever again, whereas 1/2 the Pac is eyeballing the B1G (though maybe not for awhile now with Warren gone). Big 12 has ~ $80m worth of exit fees and a GoR through 2031. Pac has a handshake and goodwill, with a bit of a bunker mentality mixed in for fun.
2. Better money: the big 12 is locked in until 2031 at ~ $30m a year per school, and also gets more NCAAT units/bowl money/etc etc. Estimates I've seen are that the Pac needs to be ~ $5m ahead of the big 12 to break even.
3. Big 12 media rights deal is on ESPN and Fox: this matters little to me as I think that Amazon is almost as good now, and perhaps will be preferable by 2030, but some of the Pac schools may not be willing to sign with Amazon right now. It's possible this is just a negotiating tactic though.

I think that the Pac should embrace their quirky/West Coast vibe and go 100% all in with Amazon, likely at a premium over the big 12 of course. Is that the safest move? Absolutely not. But they have to be daring right now if they want to right the ship and get back into poaching instead of victim mode.

The Pac's best long term play is to either merge with the big 12 or to poach a bunch of big 12 teams (after 2031). In order to get there, they'll have to take some risks, and getting more money for the risk of moving to Amazon is probably one of those. If it flops then they're no worse off than they are now, but if it succeeds they may live to fight long into the future.

(01-15-2023 12:42 PM)Poster Wrote:  The PAC supposedly was considering inviting TCU and Houston shortly after Texas and OU announced they were joining the SEC. Texas Tech was never rumored to be under consideration.

I heard that USCLA blocked that move...LOL. Nice kick to the jimmy on the way out the door.

No one is leaving the Big 12 except for a Big 10 or SEC invite.

(01-15-2023 12:47 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 12:42 PM)Poster Wrote:  The PAC supposedly was considering inviting TCU and Houston shortly after Texas and OU announced they were joining the SEC. Texas Tech was never rumored to be under consideration.

I heard that USCLA blocked that move...LOL. Nice kick to the jimmy on the way out the door.

IDK. Stanford and Cal have been even more resistant to expansion than the LA schools. In 1990, long before the Longhorn Network, Stanford is supposed to have been the sole vote preventing Texas from joining the PAC. (Back when the PAC required a unaimous vote for membership.) Stanford and Cal are also supposed to have blocked Oklahoma and Oklahoma State from joining in 2011.

Going even further back in time, Stanford and Cal supposedly were the votes blocking Arizona and Arizona State from joining the PAC, and supposedly they only relented when USC threatened to leave the conference unless the Arizona schools were admitted.

I don't think that inviting TCU and Houston in 2021 would have prevented USC and UCLA from joining the Big 10. Inviting Texas in 1990, or adding Oklahoma in 2011 (especially since that almost certainly would have forced Texas to give up the LHN and also join the PAC a few days later)- that's stuff that probably would have changed the whole history of the PAC.

(01-15-2023 12:53 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 12:47 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 12:42 PM)Poster Wrote:  The PAC supposedly was considering inviting TCU and Houston shortly after Texas and OU announced they were joining the SEC. Texas Tech was never rumored to be under consideration.

I heard that USCLA blocked that move...LOL. Nice kick to the jimmy on the way out the door.

IDK. Stanford and Cal have been even more resistant to expansion than the LA schools. In 1990, long before the Longhorn Network, Stanford is supposed to have been the sole vote preventing Texas from joining the PAC. (Back when the PAC required a unaimous vote for membership.) Stanford and Cal are also supposed to have blocked Oklahoma and Oklahoma State from joining in 2011.

Going even further back in time, Stanford and Cal supposedly were the votes blocking Arizona and Arizona State from joining the PAC, and supposedly they only relented when USC threatened to leave the conference unless the Arizona schools were admitted.

I've heard all that and believe it to be true. And I have no doubt that Stanford/Cal blocked TCU/UH last year, too, but they needed allies to help them prevent it. Enter USCLA, with already 1 foot out the door.

I swear, the Pac's ineptitude since 1984 should be turned into a tragicomedy TV movie. People out West could play it over the holidays and cry their eyes out every year.

Can absolutely see this as a real possibility. Kliakov wouldn’t be doing his job if he didn’t try the hardest to grab TCU, Oklahoma State, Kansas and Tech to play in the central time zone. SMU would be the last resort in my opinion.

I think big12 schools would consider if all current pac10 schools sign a GOR. The revenue would need to increase to at least $40 million , tv only, per school.

The big12 schools haven’t signed extended GOR. Regarding the exit fees, that could be negotiated down to 50 million per Dodd and would be doable since it would mean 6 schools leaving including Oklahoma and Texas.

Ultimately, my guess is if the big12 can’t poach pac10 schools, the pac will raid it.