I don't think the PAC would have any interest in Cincy or UCF in any circumstance, and would only be interested in Houston and BYU if still more PAC schools left.

(01-17-2023 11:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't think the PAC would have any interest in Cincy or UCF in any circumstance, and would only be interested in Houston and BYU if still more PAC schools left.

Fair, but then, the PAC would be weakened even more, and the Big XII could continue to pick off schools from the PAC until it's no more.

(01-15-2023 01:56 PM)Acres Wrote:  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.

I don't see UW or Oregon signing a long term GoR.

The PAC should have invited TCU, TECH, OSU, Kansas, KSU plus one more when TEXAS & OU announced they were leaving.

I could see this group making around $50 million. It would still be a lot less than the SEC & BIG10.

PAC16
Washington
WSU
Oregon
OSU
Stanford
CAL
Utah
Colorado
ASU
Arizona
Kansas
TECH
Oklahoma St
TCU
ISU
Houston or Baylor

PAC12 could make more if they replaced Washington St & Oregon St.

Big 12 and Pac-10 would be best served by a merger of the leagues while cutting the fat from both.

(01-20-2023 02:03 PM)AzonTheKid Wrote:  Big 12 and Pac-10 would be best served by a merger of the leagues while cutting the fat from both.

Pac could have taken the best 4-6 of the R8 summer before last but chose not to.
That ship has sailed.

they are not leaving the Big 12 for the PAC. The Big 12 after losing Texas and Oklahoma are a better conference than the PAC after losing USC and UCLA. On top of that, they aren't going to muck up their travel time and expenses to to up to the northwest, especially since the primary reason you'd want PAC is for the exposure and access in LA.

(01-16-2023 02:19 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(01-16-2023 01:50 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(01-15-2023 01:56 PM)Acres Wrote:  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.

I can't see this at all. The exit fees alone makes this a no-go from the Big 12 perspective. The future of college athletics does not lie in the West Coast where interest in college football is in rapid decline.

The Big 12 can achieve the same result with better travel and greater Eastern exposure and opportunity by having four PAC teams move East. No exit fee, no GOR.

If the PAC schools are so culturally disinclined to associate with the Big 12 schools then they will die on the vine.

Yep. Can you imagine this sales pitch, "Guys, I know you have to fork over tens of millions in exit fees, but come to the PAC12 so that the Cal Students can protest Oklahoma State's mascot for a) having a gun and b) for being not inclusive and c) part of the patriarchy."

People gotta think a bit more practically... just like the silly notion of Texas leaving the B12 to go to the ACC - these schools are not going to make lateral moves to make their travel more difficult in a same level or inferior/less stable/less income conference. Texas only would have considered jumping to the B1G and SEC in the current day, no one else. Not only would they have to pay to get out, they'd make less money too by going to a conference other than those two. The B12 is the #3 most competitive and income producing conference in college football, with or without Texas and Oklahoma, and more stable than the PAC or ACC in terms of what potentially could happen with the top dogs B1G and SEC in their next round of expansion, since the most desirable candidates for the B1G and SEC are in the PAC and ACC.

If anything occurs next, it could be Arizona State and Colorado going to the B12, and Oregon leaving the PAC to join them as well.

(01-22-2023 12:33 AM)AntiG Wrote:  People gotta think a bit more practically... just like the silly notion of Texas leaving the B12 to go to the ACC - these schools are not going to make lateral moves to make their travel more difficult in a same level or inferior/less stable/less income conference. Texas only would have considered jumping to the B1G and SEC in the current day, no one else. Not only would they have to pay to get out, they'd make less money too by going to a conference other than those two. The B12 is the #3 most competitive and income producing conference in college football, with or without Texas and Oklahoma, and more stable than the PAC or ACC in terms of what potentially could happen with the top dogs B1G and SEC in their next round of expansion, since the most desirable candidates for the B1G and SEC are in the PAC and ACC.

If anything occurs next, it could be Arizona State and Colorado going to the B12, and Oregon leaving the PAC to join them as well.

Wouldn't that be funny.

Imagine if all the PAC schools except WA, Cal, and Stanford joined the B12. That's only 7 schools. Add SDSU for 8, and call it good.

The question would then become, what do the three left behind, do?