Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
Author Message
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
The reports have been saying for months now that SMU does not have enough votes to be voted into the conference. San Diego State is still on the list. I heard UTSA, UNLV and Memphis came up.
06-05-2023 05:59 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Utgrizfan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 588
Joined: Sep 2021
Reputation: 44
I Root For: Utah, Army, Montana
Location: Utah
Post: #42
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
(06-05-2023 05:55 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 03:35 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 10:45 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  I tend to think the B12 should go after SDSU and SMU and add them now, cut the lifelines off for Pac 12, meaning if they manage to add Colorado that's ballgame

SDSU would make sense but not SMU. B12 has plenty of coverage there. SMU does make some sense for the PAC, however.

If all the PAC lost was CU they would simply replace them with CSU. It isn't like CU has been great in FB and BB as of yet and I'm not sure Deion is then next Saban. If he is, he won't be there long.

CSU? Good lord, how low does the PAC intend to go? Why not just add Boise?

I wouldn't be sure SDSU gets in. If CU stays, why would the PAC add a mouth to feed for what will likely be a 2 year deal? I doubt Oregon or Washington would vote to add SDSU, and it is likely both Stanford and Cal would also say no. If CU does not leave, I would expect the PAC to go back to the days of old, the PAC 10.

CSU is close to achieve AAU status from the article announcing the latest additions. They also have a massive amount of research $$ (more then a pair of current PAC schools I believe) so they'd definitely fit in the culture of the Conference. Primarily would be a pick to replace as much of the lost market if CU leaves.
06-05-2023 06:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Big 12 fan too Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,660
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 210
I Root For: NIU
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
(06-05-2023 03:37 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 11:02 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 10:45 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  I tend to think the B12 should go after SDSU and SMU and add them now, cut the lifelines off for Pac 12, meaning if they manage to add Colorado that's ballgame

No.

At best, SDSU would be a conditional offer- if CU leaves and other PAC stay.

Likely the PAC has given them a conditional offer of if schools leave, they’ll be backfill.

If SDSU had a firm offer to commit to from either conference, they would be committed and announced. They don’t, they’re waiting on conditions

Two schools, both in SoCal, already left the PAC.

I will repeat this once again, from day 1 Klavikoff has said they prefer to get their media deal finalized and then quickly move to expansion. Nothing has to be done in regards to SDSU until June 30. Plus, it doesn't make sense for SDSU to sign an agreement without knowing the terms.

Without knowing the terms? The only terms SDSU needs to know is that it’s not the Mountain West.

I’ll repeat this once again, but the hold up is that SDSU has at best a conditional offer. That’s consistent with Klavikoff needing to know the deal- aka whether SDSU is needed and beneficial to have in the deal. Backfill.

The current 10 schools do not benefit from adding another mouth to feed for USC/UCLA leftovers, particularly one closer to recruits/students. Any gains SDSU makes in becoming worthy of inclusion comes at the expense of current PAC. Without severe unequal revenue distribution, whatever minimal incremental increase from having SDSU isn’t worth the brand decay and competition

And adding SDSU likely means adding another G5

Not impossible SDSU gets added to this group of 10, but it is conditional. A much more likely condition is the PAC is forced to add SDSU when backfilling for losing more schools
06-05-2023 06:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RockyMTNTiger Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,492
Joined: Sep 2007
Reputation: 309
I Root For: MEMPHIS
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
The entire problem with attempting to figure out what the PAC will or won't do is that regardless of whatever plans they might have, they will be tossed out the window if multiple defections actually occur. Chaos and panic will ensue, survival instincts will take center stage and kick-in and its best to remember that desperate people do desperate things. At that level - folks that were on the fringes, outright dismissed, or considered "not worthy" might suddenly become realistic targets as flotation type institutions to simply try to keep the conference alive.
06-05-2023 06:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
random asian guy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,192
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 331
I Root For: VT, Georgetown
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
Is SMU to the ACC still a possibility? There were some reports before.
06-05-2023 07:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RUScarlets Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,143
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 176
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
(06-05-2023 07:03 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  Is SMU to the ACC still a possibility? There were some reports before.

Very good possibility. They can add them and UConn at 1/2 shares and funnel the rest to the top. Rinse repeat. I just think they need to add for value instead of markets. SMU just doesn’t give you that brand value. I’d look to swap UL for WVU and see if Yormark and the schools would be mutually interested with a unanimous vote. Just little moves on the margins while we wait another decade.
06-05-2023 07:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
I think the problem with Fox Sports is that they don't see the value of the G5 schools the way the Big 12 does. MWC and the WAC schools did get great ratings on ESPN, but not so good on CBS and Fox. The issue is that ESPN knows how to drive up the excitement for the G5 game of the week than the others. Get the top G5 schools left into an ESPN's control conference? You could see the ratings go up. Cincinnati's games will be closer to Okie State now. Same with UCF and Houston. I could say the same if Boise State, San Diego State, Fresno State, SMU, Memphis, USF, UTSA, Tulane, etc get into the ACC, Big 12 and SEC that their ratings will go up.
06-05-2023 07:41 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Aztecgolfer Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,459
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation: 187
I Root For: San Diego State
Location: San Diego
Post: #48
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
(06-05-2023 06:05 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 03:37 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 11:02 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 10:45 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  I tend to think the B12 should go after SDSU and SMU and add them now, cut the lifelines off for Pac 12, meaning if they manage to add Colorado that's ballgame

No.

At best, SDSU would be a conditional offer- if CU leaves and other PAC stay.

Likely the PAC has given them a conditional offer of if schools leave, they’ll be backfill.

If SDSU had a firm offer to commit to from either conference, they would be committed and announced. They don’t, they’re waiting on conditions

Two schools, both in SoCal, already left the PAC.

I will repeat this once again, from day 1 Klavikoff has said they prefer to get their media deal finalized and then quickly move to expansion. Nothing has to be done in regards to SDSU until June 30. Plus, it doesn't make sense for SDSU to sign an agreement without knowing the terms.

Without knowing the terms? The only terms SDSU needs to know is that it’s not the Mountain West.

I’ll repeat this once again, but the hold up is that SDSU has at best a conditional offer. That’s consistent with Klavikoff needing to know the deal- aka whether SDSU is needed and beneficial to have in the deal. Backfill.

The current 10 schools do not benefit from adding another mouth to feed for USC/UCLA leftovers, particularly one closer to recruits/students. Any gains SDSU makes in becoming worthy of inclusion comes at the expense of current PAC. Without severe unequal revenue distribution, whatever minimal incremental increase from having SDSU isn’t worth the brand decay and competition

And adding SDSU likely means adding another G5

Not impossible SDSU gets added to this group of 10, but it is conditional. A much more likely condition is the PAC is forced to add SDSU when backfilling for losing more schools

I guess we'll see, then. You seem so sure of yourself what is going on with the PAC but the PAC has been pretty tight lipped, though more than one PAC official has said they expect the deal to be sufficient to keep the conference together.

You don't understand the need for the PAC to remain in SoCal, just the recruiting area alone let alone the size of the market of 1.1M homes. Since Marcus Allen, San Diego has produced 3 more Heisman winners and then Terrell Davis. SoCal has 24M people living in it. The PAC cannot afford to lose a foothold here and if they did, the B12 would add SDSU in a heartbeat.
(This post was last modified: 06-05-2023 07:54 PM by Aztecgolfer.)
06-05-2023 07:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pony94 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 25,650
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 1177
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #49
Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
(06-05-2023 07:03 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  Is SMU to the ACC still a possibility? There were some reports before.


Getting interesting…
06-05-2023 08:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Big 12 fan too Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,660
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 210
I Root For: NIU
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
(06-05-2023 07:48 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 06:05 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 03:37 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 11:02 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 10:45 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  I tend to think the B12 should go after SDSU and SMU and add them now, cut the lifelines off for Pac 12, meaning if they manage to add Colorado that's ballgame

No.

At best, SDSU would be a conditional offer- if CU leaves and other PAC stay.

Likely the PAC has given them a conditional offer of if schools leave, they’ll be backfill.

If SDSU had a firm offer to commit to from either conference, they would be committed and announced. They don’t, they’re waiting on conditions

Two schools, both in SoCal, already left the PAC.

I will repeat this once again, from day 1 Klavikoff has said they prefer to get their media deal finalized and then quickly move to expansion. Nothing has to be done in regards to SDSU until June 30. Plus, it doesn't make sense for SDSU to sign an agreement without knowing the terms.

Without knowing the terms? The only terms SDSU needs to know is that it’s not the Mountain West.

I’ll repeat this once again, but the hold up is that SDSU has at best a conditional offer. That’s consistent with Klavikoff needing to know the deal- aka whether SDSU is needed and beneficial to have in the deal. Backfill.

The current 10 schools do not benefit from adding another mouth to feed for USC/UCLA leftovers, particularly one closer to recruits/students. Any gains SDSU makes in becoming worthy of inclusion comes at the expense of current PAC. Without severe unequal revenue distribution, whatever minimal incremental increase from having SDSU isn’t worth the brand decay and competition

And adding SDSU likely means adding another G5

Not impossible SDSU gets added to this group of 10, but it is conditional. A much more likely condition is the PAC is forced to add SDSU when backfilling for losing more schools

I guess we'll see, then. You seem so sure of yourself what is going on with the PAC but the PAC has been pretty tight lipped, though more than one PAC official has said they expect the deal to be sufficient to keep the conference together.

You don't understand the need for the PAC to remain in SoCal, just the recruiting area alone let alone the size of the market of 1.1M homes. Since Marcus Allen, San Diego has produced 3 more Heisman winners and then Terrell Davis. SoCal has 24M people living in it. The PAC cannot afford to lose a foothold here and if they did, the B12 would add SDSU in a heartbeat.


You have dozens of posts in which you’re “so sure of yourself what is going on with the PAC”

There is no question if SDSU had a commitable PAC offer they’d already be committed.

They don’t. The PAC only conditionally wants SDSU, and it’s unknown whether those conditions will come to fruition. I have no doubt some close to SDSU are confident the conditions will be met, likely flamed by Klavikoff over-promises and half-truths

Recruiting in SoCal hasn’t changed for the 10 remaining schools. USC rejects aren’t now going to MWC or lower because LA schools are in BIG. The hierarchy is the same, potentially better with USC and UCLA now playing in rust belt, although the superior P2 brand will help keep those schools ahead of PAC10.

What would change recruiting is adding another PAC school, one located in SoCal. ASU and AZ in particular are negatively impacted by that. Further, if there is a future culling, AZ schools don’t benefit from subsidizing SDSU to peer status

SoCal need is about TV valuation. That market has been somewhat lost for PAC but adding SDSU doesn’t increase the penetration enough past the many PAC alumns in SoCal to clearly offset the downsides of adding SDSU. SMU would take less money and be true expansion. Does anyone recall how the title game pulled in LA?


Just as two years ago, the Big 12 interest in SDSU is tepid at best. How many times does that conference need to turn you down to realize that? It would take a PAC school leaving without other PAC, and even then UConn is more appealing. Similar football ratings, better basketball, and adding in the east which is needed.
(This post was last modified: 06-05-2023 08:37 PM by Big 12 fan too.)
06-05-2023 08:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
random asian guy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,192
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 331
I Root For: VT, Georgetown
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Why Has SMU Talk Gone Quiet?
(06-05-2023 08:08 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(06-05-2023 07:03 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  Is SMU to the ACC still a possibility? There were some reports before.


Getting interesting…

Hey I was waiting for you.

Any intel to share?
06-05-2023 08:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.