(08-31-2023 10:12 AM)Unionman76 Wrote:  Remember when the pac12 hired this new commissioner from MGM

And he was going to change college athletics

Well he sure made big changes to his conference.

(08-30-2023 10:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:28 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 09:58 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 09:40 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  I can't help but wonder if they've passed the window of keeping their NCAA Member Conference status.

If they have, maybe there's an appeal/exception process.

They still have their existing members until next football season, if I'm not mistaken. So it's starting in 2024 that they would have an issue with not having enough teams to be a conference. That's why the talk of adding AAC teams immediately to meet the minimum requirement, then adding MWC schools the following year to limit fees for leaving.

I just don't see how a conference of AAC/MWC + Wazzu/OSU = higher money then what AAC deal is right now? At least not high enough to compensate for increase travel costs, etc. That's why the SMU deal is bonkers to me. What's the upside of being in a P5 if you receive none of the P5 money for seven years?! They're not in a position to compete in any major sports from the jump so not like they're banking on playoff money or NCAA tourney credits. Hell, in seven years elite of B10/SEC + FSU/Clemson could get smart and start their own damn league by then.

SMU Options

• American
  Year
  
  1. $7M (running total $7M)
  2. $7M (running total $14M)
  3. $7M (running total $21M)
  4. $7M (running total $28M)
  5. $7M (running total $35M)
  6. $7M (running total $42M)
  7. $7M (running total $49M)
  8. $7M (running total $56M)
  9. $7M (running total $63M)
  10. $7M (running total $70M)
      
• ACC
  Year
  
  1. $0 (running total $0)
  2. $0 (running total $0)
  3. $0 (running total $0)
  4. $0 (running total $0)
  5. $0 (running total $0)
  6. $0 (running total $0)
  7. $0 (running total $0)
  8. $39.4M (running total $39.4M)
  9. $39.4M (running total $78.8M)
  10. $39.4M (running total $118.2M)
      

Assuming you can weather the first 7 years, which option would you choose?

I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

The rumor mill is currently
1. The Pac can keep their status but the new members have to be in place by next year when the others leave.
2. The Pac will fire their commissioner and hire Aresco.
3. Aresco has some deal working to either merge with the PAC or take AAC members.
4. Add MW members starting the year after.
5. Stanford wants no part of that deal but it seams that OSU and WSU are interested. Cal is a wildcard.
All of this highly speculative. But its out there.

(08-31-2023 10:45 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:28 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 09:58 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 09:40 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  I can't help but wonder if they've passed the window of keeping their NCAA Member Conference status.

If they have, maybe there's an appeal/exception process.

They still have their existing members until next football season, if I'm not mistaken. So it's starting in 2024 that they would have an issue with not having enough teams to be a conference. That's why the talk of adding AAC teams immediately to meet the minimum requirement, then adding MWC schools the following year to limit fees for leaving.

I just don't see how a conference of AAC/MWC + Wazzu/OSU = higher money then what AAC deal is right now? At least not high enough to compensate for increase travel costs, etc. That's why the SMU deal is bonkers to me. What's the upside of being in a P5 if you receive none of the P5 money for seven years?! They're not in a position to compete in any major sports from the jump so not like they're banking on playoff money or NCAA tourney credits. Hell, in seven years elite of B10/SEC + FSU/Clemson could get smart and start their own damn league by then.

SMU Options

• American
  Year
  
  1. $7M (running total $7M)
  2. $7M (running total $14M)
  3. $7M (running total $21M)
  4. $7M (running total $28M)
  5. $7M (running total $35M)
  6. $7M (running total $42M)
  7. $7M (running total $49M)
  8. $7M (running total $56M)
  9. $7M (running total $63M)
  10. $7M (running total $70M)
      
• ACC
  Year
  
  1. $0 (running total $0)
  2. $0 (running total $0)
  3. $0 (running total $0)
  4. $0 (running total $0)
  5. $0 (running total $0)
  6. $0 (running total $0)
  7. $0 (running total $0)
  8. $39.4M (running total $39.4M)
  9. $39.4M (running total $78.8M)
  10. $39.4M (running total $118.2M)
      

Assuming you can weather the first 7 years, which option would you choose?

I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

But the above is not the real picture. SMU will still share in CFP revenue, NCAA credits & some other bowl revenue which total about $10M+ annually compared to a lesser total revenues in the AAC. So where's the risk & what's to weather?

(08-31-2023 11:42 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 10:45 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:28 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 09:58 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  They still have their existing members until next football season, if I'm not mistaken. So it's starting in 2024 that they would have an issue with not having enough teams to be a conference. That's why the talk of adding AAC teams immediately to meet the minimum requirement, then adding MWC schools the following year to limit fees for leaving.

I just don't see how a conference of AAC/MWC + Wazzu/OSU = higher money then what AAC deal is right now? At least not high enough to compensate for increase travel costs, etc. That's why the SMU deal is bonkers to me. What's the upside of being in a P5 if you receive none of the P5 money for seven years?! They're not in a position to compete in any major sports from the jump so not like they're banking on playoff money or NCAA tourney credits. Hell, in seven years elite of B10/SEC + FSU/Clemson could get smart and start their own damn league by then.

SMU Options

• American
  Year
  
  1. $7M (running total $7M)
  2. $7M (running total $14M)
  3. $7M (running total $21M)
  4. $7M (running total $28M)
  5. $7M (running total $35M)
  6. $7M (running total $42M)
  7. $7M (running total $49M)
  8. $7M (running total $56M)
  9. $7M (running total $63M)
  10. $7M (running total $70M)
      
• ACC
  Year
  
  1. $0 (running total $0)
  2. $0 (running total $0)
  3. $0 (running total $0)
  4. $0 (running total $0)
  5. $0 (running total $0)
  6. $0 (running total $0)
  7. $0 (running total $0)
  8. $39.4M (running total $39.4M)
  9. $39.4M (running total $78.8M)
  10. $39.4M (running total $118.2M)
      

Assuming you can weather the first 7 years, which option would you choose?

I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

But the above is not the real picture. SMU will still share in CFP revenue, NCAA credits & some other bowl revenue which total about $10M+ annually compared to a lesser total revenues in the AAC. So where's the risk & what's to weather?

Adjusted ACC
Year
1 - $0 (running total $0)
2 - $0 (running total $0)
3 - $0 (running total $0)
4 - $0 (running total $0)
5 - $0 (running total $0)
6 - $0 (running total $0)
7 - ACC dissolves, all hail the Power 3

(08-31-2023 11:54 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:42 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 10:45 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:28 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  I just don't see how a conference of AAC/MWC + Wazzu/OSU = higher money then what AAC deal is right now? At least not high enough to compensate for increase travel costs, etc. That's why the SMU deal is bonkers to me. What's the upside of being in a P5 if you receive none of the P5 money for seven years?! They're not in a position to compete in any major sports from the jump so not like they're banking on playoff money or NCAA tourney credits. Hell, in seven years elite of B10/SEC + FSU/Clemson could get smart and start their own damn league by then.

SMU Options

• American
  Year
  
  1. $7M (running total $7M)
  2. $7M (running total $14M)
  3. $7M (running total $21M)
  4. $7M (running total $28M)
  5. $7M (running total $35M)
  6. $7M (running total $42M)
  7. $7M (running total $49M)
  8. $7M (running total $56M)
  9. $7M (running total $63M)
  10. $7M (running total $70M)
      
• ACC
  Year
  
  1. $0 (running total $0)
  2. $0 (running total $0)
  3. $0 (running total $0)
  4. $0 (running total $0)
  5. $0 (running total $0)
  6. $0 (running total $0)
  7. $0 (running total $0)
  8. $39.4M (running total $39.4M)
  9. $39.4M (running total $78.8M)
  10. $39.4M (running total $118.2M)
      

Assuming you can weather the first 7 years, which option would you choose?

I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

But the above is not the real picture. SMU will still share in CFP revenue, NCAA credits & some other bowl revenue which total about $10M+ annually compared to a lesser total revenues in the AAC. So where's the risk & what's to weather?

Adjusted ACC
Year
1 - $0 (running total $0)
2 - $0 (running total $0)
3 - $0 (running total $0)
4 - $0 (running total $0)
5 - $0 (running total $0)
6 - $0 (running total $0)
7 - ACC dissolves, all hail the Power 3

Exactly. SMU may very well end up with egg all over their face. The ACC was destined to fall apart from the moment they raided the big east. They were in glutton mode, did not really look out into the future to see the effect of all of those additions, many in redundant markets.

I think Clemson is overrated. Once Dabo is gone, they will revert back. But if the ACC loses the Florida schools, and North Carolina, they are done.

(08-31-2023 11:54 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:42 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 10:45 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:28 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  I just don't see how a conference of AAC/MWC + Wazzu/OSU = higher money then what AAC deal is right now? At least not high enough to compensate for increase travel costs, etc. That's why the SMU deal is bonkers to me. What's the upside of being in a P5 if you receive none of the P5 money for seven years?! They're not in a position to compete in any major sports from the jump so not like they're banking on playoff money or NCAA tourney credits. Hell, in seven years elite of B10/SEC + FSU/Clemson could get smart and start their own damn league by then.

SMU Options

• American
  Year
  
  1. $7M (running total $7M)
  2. $7M (running total $14M)
  3. $7M (running total $21M)
  4. $7M (running total $28M)
  5. $7M (running total $35M)
  6. $7M (running total $42M)
  7. $7M (running total $49M)
  8. $7M (running total $56M)
  9. $7M (running total $63M)
  10. $7M (running total $70M)
      
• ACC
  Year
  
  1. $0 (running total $0)
  2. $0 (running total $0)
  3. $0 (running total $0)
  4. $0 (running total $0)
  5. $0 (running total $0)
  6. $0 (running total $0)
  7. $0 (running total $0)
  8. $39.4M (running total $39.4M)
  9. $39.4M (running total $78.8M)
  10. $39.4M (running total $118.2M)
      

Assuming you can weather the first 7 years, which option would you choose?

I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

But the above is not the real picture. SMU will still share in CFP revenue, NCAA credits & some other bowl revenue which total about $10M+ annually compared to a lesser total revenues in the AAC. So where's the risk & what's to weather?

Adjusted ACC
Year
1 - $0 (running total $0)
2 - $0 (running total $0)
3 - $0 (running total $0)
4 - $0 (running total $0)
5 - $0 (running total $0)
6 - $0 (running total $0)
7 - ACC dissolves, all hail the Power 3

That very well may be how it ends up.

But with that being an unknown, if Memphis was offered that deal, should we take it?

(08-31-2023 11:38 AM)dcg141 Wrote:  The rumor mill is currently
1. The Pac can keep their status but the new members have to be in place by next year when the others leave.
2. The Pac will fire their commissioner and hire Aresco.
3. Aresco has some deal working to either merge with the PAC or take AAC members.
4. Add MW members starting the year after.
5. Stanford wants no part of that deal but it seams that OSU and WSU are interested. Cal is a wildcard.
All of this highly speculative. But its out there.

That all seems very plausible.

The bolded part is what I've been harping on... in order for the Pac 12 to survive as a conference, this decision has to be made yesterday! This can't draw out, there has to be movement ASAP.


As far as Standford goes, at worst they stay where they are and get SMU as a conference buddy. By going along with this they are no way carving their name in stone as a long-term member who won't bolt the first chance they get. That is always an option.

And, they'll probably be top dog for a while -- conference politics wise, not on the field or court. We'll kill 'em.

(08-31-2023 11:42 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 10:45 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:28 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 09:58 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  They still have their existing members until next football season, if I'm not mistaken. So it's starting in 2024 that they would have an issue with not having enough teams to be a conference. That's why the talk of adding AAC teams immediately to meet the minimum requirement, then adding MWC schools the following year to limit fees for leaving.

I just don't see how a conference of AAC/MWC + Wazzu/OSU = higher money then what AAC deal is right now? At least not high enough to compensate for increase travel costs, etc. That's why the SMU deal is bonkers to me. What's the upside of being in a P5 if you receive none of the P5 money for seven years?! They're not in a position to compete in any major sports from the jump so not like they're banking on playoff money or NCAA tourney credits. Hell, in seven years elite of B10/SEC + FSU/Clemson could get smart and start their own damn league by then.

SMU Options

• American
  Year
  
  1. $7M (running total $7M)
  2. $7M (running total $14M)
  3. $7M (running total $21M)
  4. $7M (running total $28M)
  5. $7M (running total $35M)
  6. $7M (running total $42M)
  7. $7M (running total $49M)
  8. $7M (running total $56M)
  9. $7M (running total $63M)
  10. $7M (running total $70M)
      
• ACC
  Year
  
  1. $0 (running total $0)
  2. $0 (running total $0)
  3. $0 (running total $0)
  4. $0 (running total $0)
  5. $0 (running total $0)
  6. $0 (running total $0)
  7. $0 (running total $0)
  8. $39.4M (running total $39.4M)
  9. $39.4M (running total $78.8M)
  10. $39.4M (running total $118.2M)
      

Assuming you can weather the first 7 years, which option would you choose?

I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

But the above is not the real picture. SMU will still share in CFP revenue, NCAA credits & some other bowl revenue which total about $10M+ annually compared to a lesser total revenues in the AAC. So where's the risk & what's to weather?

I guess as long as they did the math and the money they do stand to make via those streams you mentioned is more than AAC then the eventual windfall payday is just gravy. If that's the case then that's hard to argue. I think SMU is an outlier in a lot of ways in that their fall from grace was virtue the death penalty which has never been used again. They've always had a "P5" donor base and student body (academics) so all they lacked was actually getting invited to the party. Like I said, if the math checks out then its a no brainer I just wouldn't hang my hat on getting that fat payday.

(08-31-2023 01:15 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:54 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:42 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 10:45 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  SMU Options

• American
  Year
  
  1. $7M (running total $7M)
  2. $7M (running total $14M)
  3. $7M (running total $21M)
  4. $7M (running total $28M)
  5. $7M (running total $35M)
  6. $7M (running total $42M)
  7. $7M (running total $49M)
  8. $7M (running total $56M)
  9. $7M (running total $63M)
  10. $7M (running total $70M)
      
• ACC
  Year
  
  1. $0 (running total $0)
  2. $0 (running total $0)
  3. $0 (running total $0)
  4. $0 (running total $0)
  5. $0 (running total $0)
  6. $0 (running total $0)
  7. $0 (running total $0)
  8. $39.4M (running total $39.4M)
  9. $39.4M (running total $78.8M)
  10. $39.4M (running total $118.2M)
      

Assuming you can weather the first 7 years, which option would you choose?

I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

But the above is not the real picture. SMU will still share in CFP revenue, NCAA credits & some other bowl revenue which total about $10M+ annually compared to a lesser total revenues in the AAC. So where's the risk & what's to weather?

Adjusted ACC
Year
1 - $0 (running total $0)
2 - $0 (running total $0)
3 - $0 (running total $0)
4 - $0 (running total $0)
5 - $0 (running total $0)
6 - $0 (running total $0)
7 - ACC dissolves, all hail the Power 3

That very well may be how it ends up.

But with that being an unknown, if Memphis was offered that deal, should we take it?

I would very publicly tell them to touch grass. Then make it known that Memphis doesn't want to go to a dying league.

(08-31-2023 01:19 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:38 AM)dcg141 Wrote:  The rumor mill is currently
1. The Pac can keep their status but the new members have to be in place by next year when the others leave.
2. The Pac will fire their commissioner and hire Aresco.
3. Aresco has some deal working to either merge with the PAC or take AAC members.
4. Add MW members starting the year after.
5. Stanford wants no part of that deal but it seams that OSU and WSU are interested. Cal is a wildcard.
All of this highly speculative. But its out there.

That all seems very plausible.

The bolded part is what I've been harping on... in order for the Pac 12 to survive as a conference, this decision has to be made yesterday! This can't draw out, there has to be movement ASAP.


As far as Standford goes, at worst they stay where they are and get SMU as a conference buddy. By going along with this they are no way carving their name in stone as a long-term member who won't bolt the first chance they get. That is always an option.

And, they'll probably be top dog for a while -- conference politics wise, not on the field or court. We'll kill 'em.

If the PAC takes more than half the AAC members, those members can vote to dissolve the AAC before leaving and owe no exit fees. Other than ponying up a large settlement to the AAC to get around the 27 month notice requirement in the bylaws, that's the only real way this would work.

Or the teams leaving could just threaten to dismantle the AAC if the other teams didn't let them leave.

The ACC isn't going anywhere until at least 2036. Which is why SMU's maneuvering is so smart. This idea of the ACC dissolving is crazy talk.

The same GOR in the ESPN deal that has Florida State bitching and moaning because they know they are stuck will keep the league together. A 20-year deal for Florida State and Clemson was dumb, but it's great for Wake Forest, BC, Syracuse . . . because if their TV deal was expiring like the Pac12 deal, and the ACC big dogs got pilfered, the ACC dregs would be looking at a TV deal only slightly better than what we are making.

As long as the ACC has 15 schools, the ESPN deal is locked in. The ACC is smart enough to try to grab Stanford and Cal now than to have to backfill with G5's like UConn and Memphis and Tulane later.

(08-31-2023 01:19 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:38 AM)dcg141 Wrote:  The rumor mill is currently
1. The Pac can keep their status but the new members have to be in place by next year when the others leave.
2. The Pac will fire their commissioner and hire Aresco.
3. Aresco has some deal working to either merge with the PAC or take AAC members.
4. Add MW members starting the year after.
5. Stanford wants no part of that deal but it seams that OSU and WSU are interested. Cal is a wildcard.
All of this highly speculative. But its out there.

That all seems very plausible.

The bolded part is what I've been harping on... in order for the Pac 12 to survive as a conference, this decision has to be made yesterday! This can't draw out, there has to be movement ASAP.


As far as Standford goes, at worst they stay where they are and get SMU as a conference buddy. By going along with this they are no way carving their name in stone as a long-term member who won't bolt the first chance they get. That is always an option.

And, they'll probably be top dog for a while -- conference politics wise, not on the field or court. We'll kill 'em.

Everyone is waiting on the ACC. They longer that plays out it seems that the schools that need to flip are not doing so. The clock is ticking.

(08-31-2023 01:54 PM)dcg141 Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 01:19 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:38 AM)dcg141 Wrote:  The rumor mill is currently
1. The Pac can keep their status but the new members have to be in place by next year when the others leave.
2. The Pac will fire their commissioner and hire Aresco.
3. Aresco has some deal working to either merge with the PAC or take AAC members.
4. Add MW members starting the year after.
5. Stanford wants no part of that deal but it seams that OSU and WSU are interested. Cal is a wildcard.
All of this highly speculative. But its out there.

That all seems very plausible.

The bolded part is what I've been harping on... in order for the Pac 12 to survive as a conference, this decision has to be made yesterday! This can't draw out, there has to be movement ASAP.


As far as Standford goes, at worst they stay where they are and get SMU as a conference buddy. By going along with this they are no way carving their name in stone as a long-term member who won't bolt the first chance they get. That is always an option.

And, they'll probably be top dog for a while -- conference politics wise, not on the field or court. We'll kill 'em.

Everyone is waiting on the ACC. They longer that plays out it seems that the schools that need to flip are not doing so. The clock is ticking.

And the ACC pumped the breaks because of the shooting at UNC.

(08-31-2023 01:39 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 01:15 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:54 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:42 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 10:45 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

But the above is not the real picture. SMU will still share in CFP revenue, NCAA credits & some other bowl revenue which total about $10M+ annually compared to a lesser total revenues in the AAC. So where's the risk & what's to weather?

Adjusted ACC
Year
1 - $0 (running total $0)
2 - $0 (running total $0)
3 - $0 (running total $0)
4 - $0 (running total $0)
5 - $0 (running total $0)
6 - $0 (running total $0)
7 - ACC dissolves, all hail the Power 3

That very well may be how it ends up.

But with that being an unknown, if Memphis was offered that deal, should we take it?

I would very publicly tell them to touch grass. Then make it known that Memphis doesn't want to go to a dying league.

As of now, the ACC isn't a dying league, but the PAC 12 seems to be.

But who knows... maybe the Pac will make some moves and end up being a solid league down the road.

And maybe the ACC gets split among the SEC, B1G and Big 12.

If it does end up getting split, it might have been a good deal to join way back in 2023 in order to be one of the schools that gets divvied up.

(08-31-2023 01:54 PM)dcg141 Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 01:19 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:38 AM)dcg141 Wrote:  The rumor mill is currently
1. The Pac can keep their status but the new members have to be in place by next year when the others leave.
2. The Pac will fire their commissioner and hire Aresco.
3. Aresco has some deal working to either merge with the PAC or take AAC members.
4. Add MW members starting the year after.
5. Stanford wants no part of that deal but it seams that OSU and WSU are interested. Cal is a wildcard.
All of this highly speculative. But its out there.

That all seems very plausible.

The bolded part is what I've been harping on... in order for the Pac 12 to survive as a conference, this decision has to be made yesterday! This can't draw out, there has to be movement ASAP.


As far as Standford goes, at worst they stay where they are and get SMU as a conference buddy. By going along with this they are no way carving their name in stone as a long-term member who won't bolt the first chance they get. That is always an option.

And, they'll probably be top dog for a while -- conference politics wise, not on the field or court. We'll kill 'em.

Everyone is waiting on the ACC. They longer that plays out it seems that the schools that need to flip are not doing so. The clock is ticking.

You know, thinking a bit more about the scenario you painted, recollection of the Big East fiasco came up.

In 2013 the 7 Catholic bball only schools left the Big East and formed a new conference. As part of the divorce agreement, they got to keep the Big East name but the Big East conference charter remained.

So... I could see a possible scenario where the Pac 12 conference charter stays in place, the AAC commissioner and schools join the Pac 12 charter immediately. I guess this would mean no exit fees and no penalties for leaving without proper notice.

Of course, I guess this means ALL schools fold into the PAC 12 charter on paper, but it would look like the last Pac 4 joined the AAC.

That would be 15 AAC schools...
14 Football (Navy)
14 Basketball (Wich St)

Plus Pac 4 making 19 full members with 18 for each revenue sport.

Football

AAC New
Charlotte
Florida Atlantic
North Texas
Rice
UAB
UTSA

AAC Veterans
ECU
Memphis
Navy (FB)
SMU
South Florida
Temple
Tulane
Tulsa
Wichita St (BB)

Pac 4
Cal
Oregon St
Stanford
Washington St

18 Football Teams
18 Basketball

------------------
AAC divided into 2 Divisions with 2 Conferences each.

American East
Atlantic
Charlotte
Florida Atlantic
ECU
Navy (FB)
Temple

Gulf
South Florida
Rice
Tulane
UAB

American West
Pacific
Cal
Oregon St
Stanford
Washington St

Southwest
Memphis
North Texas
Rice
UTSA
Wichita State (BB)

American East has 9 football and 8 basketball.
American West has 8 football and 9 basketball.

AAC Conference Schedule Football
Each school plays 9 conference games and 3 non-conference games.

AmWest school plays all other AmWest schools for total of 7 games.
AmWest school plays 1 AmEast Atlantic school and 1 Gulf school for total or 2 games.

AmEast school plays all AmEast schools but 1 (rotating) for total of 7 games.
AmEast school plays 1 Am Southwest school and 1 Pacific school for total of 2 games.

AAC Conference Championship Series
AmWest Southwest champ plays AmWest Pacific champ at site of higher ranked school to determine AmWest Division champ.

AmEast Gulf champ plays AmEast Atlantic champ at site of higher ranked school to determine AmEast Division champ.

AmWest Division champ plays AmEast Division champ at rotating neutral site.

(08-31-2023 11:54 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 11:42 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-31-2023 10:45 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:39 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-30-2023 10:28 AM)true_blue_thru_and_thru Wrote:  I just don't see how a conference of AAC/MWC + Wazzu/OSU = higher money then what AAC deal is right now? At least not high enough to compensate for increase travel costs, etc. That's why the SMU deal is bonkers to me. What's the upside of being in a P5 if you receive none of the P5 money for seven years?! They're not in a position to compete in any major sports from the jump so not like they're banking on playoff money or NCAA tourney credits. Hell, in seven years elite of B10/SEC + FSU/Clemson could get smart and start their own damn league by then.

SMU Options

• American
  Year
  
  1. $7M (running total $7M)
  2. $7M (running total $14M)
  3. $7M (running total $21M)
  4. $7M (running total $28M)
  5. $7M (running total $35M)
  6. $7M (running total $42M)
  7. $7M (running total $49M)
  8. $7M (running total $56M)
  9. $7M (running total $63M)
  10. $7M (running total $70M)
      
• ACC
  Year
  
  1. $0 (running total $0)
  2. $0 (running total $0)
  3. $0 (running total $0)
  4. $0 (running total $0)
  5. $0 (running total $0)
  6. $0 (running total $0)
  7. $0 (running total $0)
  8. $39.4M (running total $39.4M)
  9. $39.4M (running total $78.8M)
  10. $39.4M (running total $118.2M)
      

Assuming you can weather the first 7 years, which option would you choose?

I get that and in a vacuum for sure its a no brainer but what assurances do they have FSU/Clemson aren't jumping ship before the money hits? I don't blame them for doing it because its aggressive but its def risky too. Maybe they have a clause in there that if the ACC dissolves or media deal goes to a certain amount they get a lump sum as "damages" but at any rate its a risky move IMO.

But the above is not the real picture. SMU will still share in CFP revenue, NCAA credits & some other bowl revenue which total about $10M+ annually compared to a lesser total revenues in the AAC. So where's the risk & what's to weather?

Adjusted ACC
Year
1 - $0 (running total $0)
2 - $0 (running total $0)
3 - $0 (running total $0)
4 - $0 (running total $0)
5 - $0 (running total $0)
6 - $0 (running total $0)
7 - ACC dissolves, all hail the Power 3

I'm with Atlanta on this one. Memphis had the 2nd largest full AAC distribution from the most recent 990 and that was $8,976,491. SMU was 6th at $8,286,196. They can potentially get that from the CFP/bowl game distributions and BB tourney. The P5 conferences got approximately $79.41M each from base CFP distributions recently. That's around $5.67M per school just from base CFP alone. And that total number will potentially be much higher once the playoff expands.

Mountain West Conference
12 Members
Air Force
Boise State
Colorado State
Fresno State
Hawai'i
Nevada
New Mexico
San Diego State
San Jose State
UNLV
Utah State
Wyoming

AAC 18
MWC 12
Total 30

That may be way too many.


If it's still advantageous to take some MWC schools... maybe up to 6 from these bringing total to 24.
Air Force (Pop 0.8M, DMA 86)
Boise State (Pop 0.8M, DMA 98)
San Diego State (Pop 3.3M, DMA 30)
??? UNLV - Vegas (Pop 2.2M, DMA 40)
??? Fresno State (Pop 1.0M, DMA 54)
??? Colorado State (Pop 0.4M, DMA 16)
??? Nevada (Pop 0.5M, DMA 102)
??? Utah State (Pop 0.2M, DMA 34)
??? San Jose State (Pop 2.0M, DMA 10)

AmWest Southwest can move to AmEast.
AmWest adds 2 conferences made up of MWC schools.

Each division would have 2 conferences of 6 teams each.

American East Conference

• Atlantic Division
  • Charlotte
  • Florida Atlantic
  • ECU
  • Navy (FB)
  • South Florida
  • Temple
    
• Southwest Division
  • Memphis
  • North Texas
  • Rice
  • Tulane
  • UAB
  • UTSA
  • Wichita State (BB)
    

American West Conference

• Pacific Division
  • Cal
  • Oregon State
  • San Diego State
  • San Jose State
  • Stanford
  • Washington State
    
• Mountain Division
  • Air Force
  • Boise State
  • Colorado State
  • Fresno State
  • UNLV
  • Utah State
    

AAC Football Schedule
School plays all other division schools - 5 games
School plays 2 cross division schools - 2 games
School plays 2 cross conference schools, 1 from each division - 2 games
Total of 9 conference games

American Athletic Conference Football Championship Series
American East Conference
Atlantic Division champ vs Southwest Division champ

American West Conference
Pacific Division champ vs Mountain Division champ

American East champ vs American West champ

(08-31-2023 04:29 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  Mountain West Conference
12 Members
Air Force
Boise State
Colorado State
Fresno State
Hawai'i
Nevada
New Mexico
San Diego State
San Jose State
UNLV
Utah State
Wyoming

AAC 18
MWC 12
Total 30

That may be way too many.


If it's still advantageous to take some MWC schools... maybe up to 6 from these bringing total to 24.
Air Force (Pop 0.8M, DMA 86)
Boise State (Pop 0.8M, DMA 98)
San Diego State (Pop 3.3M, DMA 30)
??? UNLV - Vegas (Pop 2.2M, DMA 40)
??? Fresno State (Pop 1.0M, DMA 54)
??? Colorado State (Pop 0.4M, DMA 16)
??? Nevada (Pop 0.5M, DMA 102)
??? Utah State (Pop 0.2M, DMA 34)
??? San Jose State (Pop 2.0M, DMA 10)

AmWest Southwest can move to AmEast.
AmWest adds 2 conferences made up of MWC schools.

Each division would have 2 conferences of 6 teams each.

American East Conference

• Atlantic Division
  • Charlotte
  • Florida Atlantic
  • ECU
  • Navy (FB)
  • South Florida
  • Temple
    
• Southwest Division
  • Memphis
  • North Texas
  • Rice
  • Tulane
  • UAB
  • UTSA
  • Wichita State (BB)
    

American West Conference

• Pacific Division
  • Cal
  • Oregon State
  • San Diego State
  • San Jose State
  • Stanford
  • Washington State
    
• Mountain Division
  • Air Force
  • Boise State
  • Colorado State
  • Fresno State
  • UNLV
  • Utah State
    

AAC Football Schedule
School plays all other division schools - 5 games
School plays 2 cross division schools - 2 games
School plays 2 cross conference schools, 1 from each division - 2 games
Total of 9 conference games

American Athletic Conference Football Championship Series
American East Conference
Atlantic Division champ vs Southwest Division champ

American West Conference
Pacific Division champ vs Mountain Division champ

American East champ vs American West champ

And bring Gonzaga on in as well to take Air Force's place in basketball while Wichita takes Navy's place.

I do think it needs to be 14, 16, 20 or 24 teams to make it work from a regional perspective. With 14 or 16 you can do two divisions and with 20 or 24 you could do your division/conference structure.

Current rumors sound like (at least to me) that there still isn’t enough votes to expand the ACC. Surprising (if true). If they leave tomorrow’s meeting without a yes, the California two are really going to start panicking.