Back in November, it was reported by Ross Dellenger that:

"The SBC presidents gathered for an emergency call to discuss realignment. At the center of the meeting was a proposal from out West.

Oregon State and Washington State were interested in a short-term scheduling alliance with the conference. Deliberation didn’t take long. The presidents were not interested. The travel was too far and there were no real financial incentives."

Would you have preferred the SBC accept WSU and OSU's proposal? Or are you glad the SBC didn't accept the alliance?

I’m glad we didn’t accept it. They just wanted to use us and have all the control as they did it. No thanks.

I'm sure the money would be nice but I don't think our fans would be more excited about giving up trip to Georgia State for Oregon State or giving up home game with ODU for home game with Washington State because that's what would have happened though might have been home game with OSU or trip to Washington State.

Either way the deal would have meant giving up either the Georgia State or hosting ODU and I just don't think either of the Pac-2 schools has any more impact. In fact I expect our coaches would be miffed if it had been give up the Georgia State trip for a trip to Oregon or Washington.

I don't know how anyone else feels but I like our schedule and if the day comes that SEC and Big 10 go to 10 game conference schedules to maximize money and Big XII and ACC follow, I'm perfectly fine with going to a 10 game schedule and playing four crossover games. There aren't a lot of non-conference games I care about. Memphis and to a lesser degree Tulsa. I wouldn't mind playing some other AAC home/home or playing some of the MWC front range schools but after that it's just nothing to get excited about.

If there was anything in it for us, we would’ve done it.

There wasn’t, so we didn’t.

Nah. They were just playing hardball trying to act like they had power over MW but the MW held all the cards

That would be so opposite of what we have built.

If you can get winnable P5 home and home games it’s hard to turn down. Now whichever MWC team takes down both Wazzu and OSU will surely be a lock on playoff with 10 or more wins.

(04-13-2024 01:12 PM)Johnnychimpo Wrote:  If you can get winnable P5 home and home games it’s hard to turn down. Now whichever MWC team takes down both Wazzu and OSU will surely be a lock on playoff with 10 or more wins.

Yep. SOS for football goes up when you add Washington State and Oregon State to the mix. Plus getting P5 home games is a difference maker for national interest and increased odds of winning.
The wise choice was to accept a scheduling alliance if it was available and have a better chance to be the single G5 come champ that gets a bid to the 12 team CFP.

Of course, there were actually 2 slots for G5 in the 12 team CFP for 2024 and 2025, and the Sun Belt voted to give one slot back.
We aren’t talking about outstanding visionaries with the Sun Belt rep President Hawkins and the Commish Gill. We’ll see who gets the G5 bid the next 2 years. If the Sun Belt champ finishes at the #2 ranked G5 champ in either year, Hawkins and Gill will have blood on their hands.

(04-13-2024 09:36 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  

(04-13-2024 01:12 PM)Johnnychimpo Wrote:  If you can get winnable P5 home and home games it’s hard to turn down. Now whichever MWC team takes down both Wazzu and OSU will surely be a lock on playoff with 10 or more wins.

Yep. SOS for football goes up when you add Washington State and Oregon State to the mix. Plus getting P5 home games is a difference maker for national interest and increased odds of winning.
The wise choice was to accept a scheduling alliance if it was available and have a better chance to be the single G5 come champ that gets a bid to the 12 team CFP.

Of course, there were actually 2 slots for G5 in the 12 team CFP for 2024 and 2025, and the Sun Belt voted to give one slot back.
We aren’t talking about outstanding visionaries with the Sun Belt rep President Hawkins and the Commish Gill. We’ll see who gets the G5 bid the next 2 years. If the Sun Belt champ finishes at the #2 ranked G5 champ in either year, Hawkins and Gill will have blood on their hands.

How does that work?

(04-14-2024 06:05 AM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(04-13-2024 09:36 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  

(04-13-2024 01:12 PM)Johnnychimpo Wrote:  If you can get winnable P5 home and home games it’s hard to turn down. Now whichever MWC team takes down both Wazzu and OSU will surely be a lock on playoff with 10 or more wins.

Yep. SOS for football goes up when you add Washington State and Oregon State to the mix. Plus getting P5 home games is a difference maker for national interest and increased odds of winning.
The wise choice was to accept a scheduling alliance if it was available and have a better chance to be the single G5 come champ that gets a bid to the 12 team CFP.

Of course, there were actually 2 slots for G5 in the 12 team CFP for 2024 and 2025, and the Sun Belt voted to give one slot back.
We aren’t talking about outstanding visionaries with the Sun Belt rep President Hawkins and the Commish Gill. We’ll see who gets the G5 bid the next 2 years. If the Sun Belt champ finishes at the #2 ranked G5 champ in either year, Hawkins and Gill will have blood on their hands.

How does that work?

1. Hard schedule
2. Beat South Carolina or Jacksonville State
3. Don’t get shafted; take it in your hands
4. After all the hard work and even the frustration, shoot your shot

Liberty proved last year SOS isn’t as important as being undefeated.

No upside for the SBC, only those two would benefit from it...

I think it would have been neat. Playing a game against OSU or Wazzu at home would have been interesting, and the away game would be a good excuse for me to visit some family I have in Washington. But if there were no financial incentives to do it then yea other than novelty and getting some games against new opponents not a ton of reason to do it.

Guaranteed winnable P5 home game for all of us and a winnable road trip to the PNW? It would've been nice. Just drop one of the cross divisional opponents for each school to replace this with.

I think the way I understood it was they wouldn't travel here, we'd all have to go out there, the games would've counted as conference games for us, but not for them.. It was something wacky, that's why it was shot down..

This article states they agreed to something with the MWC (https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...est-faq).. Which seems to be more doable and I think was a good thing for the MWC, but for the Sun Belt it was a no go... I'm not sure if the same thing was offered up to Gill and crew or not... I thought what I stated above was what was offered to the Belt, CUSA, and maybe even the AAC.. I could be wrong and would love if someone has some inside baseball and knows the true ins and outs of what was offered..

Hero Sports had an article as well:

https://herosports.com/fbs-osu-football-...c-12-cpcp/

And the blurb about the Sun Belt is as follows:

Pac-12/Sun Belt Scheduling Alliance?
The presidents of Sun Belt Conference schools reportedly met to go over potential plans by Oregon State and Washington State that would include a scheduling alliance between the Sun Belt and those two schools, according to Yahoo Sports.

However, those discussions were reportedly short. The Sun Belt’s leaders believed there was too much travel and not enough financial gain possible with an arrangement like that.

(04-15-2024 09:12 AM)gdunn Wrote:  I think the way I understood it was they wouldn't travel here, we'd all have to go out there, the games would've counted as conference games for us, but not for them.. It was something wacky, that's why it was shot down..

This article states they agreed to something with the MWC (https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...est-faq).. Which seems to be more doable and I think was a good thing for the MWC, but for the Sun Belt it was a no go... I'm not sure if the same thing was offered up to Gill and crew or not... I thought what I stated above was what was offered to the Belt, CUSA, and maybe even the AAC.. I could be wrong and would love if someone has some inside baseball and knows the true ins and outs of what was offered..

Hero Sports had an article as well:

https://herosports.com/fbs-osu-football-...c-12-cpcp/

And the blurb about the Sun Belt is as follows:

Pac-12/Sun Belt Scheduling Alliance?
The presidents of Sun Belt Conference schools reportedly met to go over potential plans by Oregon State and Washington State that would include a scheduling alliance between the Sun Belt and those two schools, according to Yahoo Sports.

However, those discussions were reportedly short. The Sun Belt’s leaders believed there was too much travel and not enough financial gain possible with an arrangement like that.

Pretty sure PAC2 offered the partnership to MWC first, they wouldn't take the bad terms, so they tried it with us, we also said No, then the MWC got what they wanted from the PAC2.

(04-15-2024 09:30 AM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(04-15-2024 09:12 AM)gdunn Wrote:  I think the way I understood it was they wouldn't travel here, we'd all have to go out there, the games would've counted as conference games for us, but not for them.. It was something wacky, that's why it was shot down..

This article states they agreed to something with the MWC (https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...est-faq).. Which seems to be more doable and I think was a good thing for the MWC, but for the Sun Belt it was a no go... I'm not sure if the same thing was offered up to Gill and crew or not... I thought what I stated above was what was offered to the Belt, CUSA, and maybe even the AAC.. I could be wrong and would love if someone has some inside baseball and knows the true ins and outs of what was offered..

Hero Sports had an article as well:

https://herosports.com/fbs-osu-football-...c-12-cpcp/

And the blurb about the Sun Belt is as follows:

Pac-12/Sun Belt Scheduling Alliance?
The presidents of Sun Belt Conference schools reportedly met to go over potential plans by Oregon State and Washington State that would include a scheduling alliance between the Sun Belt and those two schools, according to Yahoo Sports.

However, those discussions were reportedly short. The Sun Belt’s leaders believed there was too much travel and not enough financial gain possible with an arrangement like that.

Pretty sure PAC2 offered the partnership to MWC first, they wouldn't take the bad terms, so they tried it with us, we also said No, then the MWC got what they wanted from the PAC2.

That makes sense...

I kinda wish the deal would have been made but only on a two-year contract.

if the deal had been mutually beneficial I'd like to have seen it, but from memory it was very one sided toward the PAC2 so no reason to sign it.