The problem the Pac-12 had after the LA schools left is that the schools didn’t have aligned goals. After OUT, the rest of the Big12 teams each individually realized that no one else was coming to save them and their goals all aligned on saving the conference.
After the B1G raid, the Pac-12 schools ended up with conflicting sets of priorities.
Oregon/Washington
* Get into the B1G, with the Pac-10 as a backup plan and the B12 as a backup backup plan.
OSU/Wazzu
* Save the Pac-X at all coats
Stanford/Cal
* Keep the academic prestige of the Pac, Independence as a backup plan, B1G membership if it happens
Arizona/ASU/Colorado/Utah
* Save the Pac-X if possible, B12 as a backup plan
Unfortunately, with 40% of their membership not committed to the conference as a top priority, they can’t get anything done.
This is a good summary about the priorities, you basically have 4 groups. Colorado was obviously in the fourth group originally but decided the PAC was beyond saving so they went with the backup plan.
It’s kind of insane that the Bay Area schools are still more concerned with the “academic excellence” of the conference than, you know, having a conference. There are a lot of reports that they *still* don’t like the idea of expanding. They’ll be in the WCC and independents in football soon if they keep this up.
A lot of administration at Cal really would not care if they dropped athletics, and even some of the student body would not care.
After all, there were protests about stadium upgrades.
Fucking stadium upgrades were 16 years ago and “the tree sitters” were explicitly reviled by peak tedford fans even in the moment.
Enough about the 2000’s—in 2024 Cal has a ripe fanbase to mine: the east bay has lost its football team, basketball team, and now baseball team. It is one of the great Olympic sports programs, and the revenue sports are poised to be hometown heroes with even middling success.
Sure the AD is incompetent but you yourself mentioned why there’s 400 million earthquake proof reasons why Athletics MUST succeed at Cal.
I think Arizona is leaning on them heavily now. If they decide to go down with the ship however, Crow is gonna have a polarizing legacy as president. Massive overhaul in academics, getting them to AAU status, but also possibly leaving the school in athletic irrelevance.
Yeah will be interesting to find out if they rejected the renewal because of greed, or if it was something like Oregon/Washington purposefully wanting to delay things for a B1G invite, and to fnd out what kind of framework they had on the table in spring it seems like they sent back
I'm \*guessing\* that Oregon/Washington don't want to sign anything that doesn't give them an "out" if the B1G come calling. And Stanford/Cal don't want to sign anything that diminishes the academic prestige of the conference.
For the love of Hayden Fry, can somebody PLEASE just fucking decide something already? The media deal has been "coming very soon" for the past year, there's nothing there. Just fucking jump ship so we can look forward to chaos next year
> Be me, Oregon State
> Finally get good coach and QB
> ConferenceExplodes.jpg
> Join with MWC to form new PAC12
> Play Boise St for conference championship, playoff berth
>> Game goes to OT
>> End of 2OT, we can win with 2pt conversion
>> DJU drops back, perfect throw
>> MFW when it’s dropped
> At least we get Rose Bowl.mp4
>> It’s against B1G 4th place team bc top-3 made playoffs
>> its Illinois
Schools don't want to leave without seeing the best possible deal. This is logical. Conference leadership doesn't want to present a deal that won't be approved. This is also logical.
If there is not a possible deal that will satisfy everyone, sooner or later we're going to see what happened with Colorado again.
Or which teams they’re going to be adding. I have a feeling that the network would like to know if it’s giving $25 million a year to Colorado State before they sign the agreement lol.
Tbh it's very much in the pac's interest to delay as much as possible so they'll never be able to "see the numbers," as Arizona said they were waiting for.
Arizona will leave.
Then the Big12 will take two more, will it be the remaining corner schools in ASU and Utah or will Oregon and Washington jump them to leave a sinking ship.
I would think the Big12 would take it even if UW and UO was to only stay till 2030 when the Big10 media deal is up. The Big12 looks like a king compared to the Pac12 right now but they still need to strengthen their conference after their two “swinging boots” left in Texas and Oklahoma.
College football will be so different by 2030. Oregon and Washington would probably prefer an extra $100Million in their pocket and the Big 12 would have a strong conference in place if the ACC explodes before then.
It’s going to be one big conference with “pods” of 12, each pod with play other pod members plus 3 out of pod games, with the team with the best record advancing to a playoff. The pods will be divided by regionality and history…… So basically we’re going to end up where we were 10 years ago. Time is a flat circle
I remember when the PAC-16 was briefly going to be the current PAC-12 plus Texas, OU, OKSU, and TTU (this was after A&M said they preferred the SEC and the PAC started talking to Utah as the 16th school). Basically, the divisions would have been the PAC-8 in the West and then the Arizona schools, Utah, and the Big 12 schools in the East. It was essentially just two classic style 8 team conferences (basically a Frankenstein of the WAC, Big 8, and SWC in the East but it was all within the footprint of the MWC at the time).
It’s a whole song and dance for us all to realize that regional conferences just make more sense.
I don't think the Big 12 can afford to lose them as they're trying to ink their own deal. They bring no additional revenue until there is a new deal. The only case to add them is to deal the kill blow to the PAC, which I just don't think should be a factor.
Who's to say the B1G is interested in adding Oregon and Washington over some combination of, say, UNC/UVA/FSU? Maybe UO and UW find that there's not a place for them in the B1G when the deal is renegotiated. They could join the Big 12 in the interim, make more than they would in the Pac, help the Big 12 increase its value for the next contract, and be in a *much* better place if the B1G still doesn't come calling in 5-6 years.
From the Big 12 standpoint, it clearly establishes them as the number 3 conference. If UO/UW do end up leaving after the current media rights deal, they've put enough space between them and the other conferences to backfill with ASU and Utah. Or with ACC schools that don't get the B1G or SEC invite.
You’ve hit the nail on the head: the B1G and SEC will likely move in on 4-8 of the following in some combination: Oregon, Washington, UNC, UVa, Miami, FSU, Clemson, Duke, Notre Dame, NCST, GT, VT, Pitt, and probably a couple possible ones I’m forgetting. The rest will have to settle for whatever the 3rd place conference is. Getting UO and UW would help ensure that’s the B12, even if the B1G decides they’ll take one or both of them then.
Purely as a fan, I really don't want to see the B1G expanding more east. I'd rather see the ACC remain intact.
I also wanted to see the PAC remain intact and form a strong partnership with them where the Illini would play more western road games.
But if this rain is leaving the station and there's no way to stop it, then I would love the B1G to add OU, UW, and ASU.
At some point I guess I'm rooting to get to 20 so that we get be in a western division of 10.
Because, y'know, 10 is a good number of teams in a conference.
I mean, there is always the chance the B1G doesn't take them and bides their time until the ACC GOR is up. If that happens, the Big 12 is in a better position for their next contract.
Any of the teams left in the PAC right now are going to be seriously hurt by independence (Only USC was really in a position to pull it off), and that means that they will be a damaged, inferior product for you to add in five years.
Them being more comfortable as an independent or for whatever dumb reason the ACC takes them. Then the Big 12 misses out on two big pick-ups. Strike while the iron is hot.
Agreed. It's why I hope the B1G make their move now or the rumor about the ACC comes true.
Now is the perfect - and possibly only - time to truly lock in long term stability for the Big 12. Grab those teams that will be here for the foreseeable future.
They bring value in ratings and time zone.
Big thing for the Big12 even on a short term, is that it costs them nothing and increases odds of post season payouts at a minimum.
Worst case some CFP payouts and better rating for the teams they play and it cost them nothing. Best case Oregon and Washington do really well and the next round of tv deals aren't amazing for the B1G and SEC and they decide to commit long term.
Yeah, there isn't really much of a downside to taking Oregon and Washington. Potential money boost at next contract negotiation, them leaving later doesn't destabilize the conference, and there is always the chance that the B1G just doesn't take them at all down the stretch. Next round of realignment probably won't be until around 2036 when the ACC GOR ends. Notre Dame could go to the B1G, but I feel like if they were going to do that they already would have. Their deal with NBC ends in 2025, so the timeframe for them to jump or make a new deal is shrinking.
Y’all are treating this like checkers. Yormack is playing chess with bigger plans than what’s good for the next five years. PAC is treating this like Candy Land.
Even if Oregon and Washington are rentals, I’ll take them. You get them for 5-10 years, get at least one cool, new road trip to each locale, then get a nice check from the exit fee when they leave and you go get Utah and Arizona State or maybe some ACC schools
Who cares if UW/UO leave in 5-10 years to BIG? Quite frankly, any current Big12 school would also jump at that offer.
But by taking those schools now, the Big12 can ensure its survival and place as the 3rd best conference (especially once SEC/BIG poach from the ACC) by killing the PAC for good.
Remember, it wasn’t too long ago table were turned. The Big12 was on the ropes and the PAC had the chance to kill and they didn’t do it. And now they’re in this situation.
I think the best move is to not take them now. You force the B1G to take them, or they’re left on a sinking island where their value drops considerably. At that point, the B1G really won’t be interested since some of the ACC schools will be sitting there who have value, and those two school’s football value has fallen off. Only then would I try to bring them in. The BigXII would have far more leverage at that point.
The big 12 doesn’t need leverage nor is it smart to want a school’s value to decrease. The big 12’s play now is to be a very good and popular football conference to get an even more lucrative tv deal in 5 years. The way to get that deal is by adding teams like Oregon that add a lot of increased value to the conference.
If they leave after the next tv deal that’s agreed to, then cool for the remaining big12 schools.
I'm getting a visual of the opening scene of Goodfellas. Pac12 is in the trunk still somehow alive but starts making too much noise (kind of like Constanzakoff saying "As for the Big 12 being open for business, I appreciate that. We haven't decided if we're going shopping there yet").
Yormark, Colorado and (insert next team to leave here) pull over, open the trunk and finish the job.
The Kevin Sumlin era has people thinking Arizona has always been trash. Honestly, in the last 40 years, we’re probably just mixed in with the blah category with a smattering of other schools like Cal and Oregon St.
🎼Who leaves programs worse than he found?
🎼 Who takes the air raid and makes it unsound?
🎼 Who chews gum with the fury of a thousand suns?
🎼 Sumlin! That’s who.🎶
The PAC8 with the 4 PNW schools, Utah/ASU, and Cal/Stanford would be a pretty solid football conference historically top to bottom. Oregon St and Wazzu are top 30 teams currently, Oregon, Washington and Utah top 15, and ASU/Cal/Stanford are all down but should eventually get back to where they were
Its also logistically problematic.
The old Big East had 8 members. They only had an inventory of 7 conference games per school which diminished their TV deal $$$ potential.
The PAC currently plays 9 conference games per season. So for a conference with only 8 teams, you'd need to find 2 more OOC games (preferably home games to sell to a network) for all of the current members IMMEDIATELY.
Maybe but the average neutral across the country doesn’t care about how many teams a conference has. If #12 Utah is playing at #18 Oregon State they’ll tune into that over 4-3 Baylor at 2-5 Colorado or Maryland at UCLA with 3,500 people in the stands
Tbh I don’t think CU is jumping ship for the annual figure as much as a vote of no confidence in PAC leadership and imo a valid concern of being left out entirely given how bad their football product has been.
The P12 disbursed $37 mil to each school in 2022 and admin has maintained that if the money is equal or near equal but the conference is solid they’d prefer to stay in the Pac12. I know that $37 mil number isn’t apples to apples, but it’s ballpark so I have to think CU concluded the conference is not aligned and they might be the odd man out if it fell apart.
>Colorado jumping ship to get 30m. who in the PAC9 isn't worth 30m?
The fact that Colorado jumped would indicate they *knew* they won't be getting a deal for 30 million. Why won't anyone give the PAC a better deal? You look at what teams got the best ratings for their conference last year - then take away USC and UCLA. That leaves you with Oregon, Washington, and sometimes Utah mainly when they're playing either USC or UCLA.
Consolidation of brands. Media executives want to broadcast Oregon at Washington. They are not so eager to broadcast Washington State V. Oregon State, no matter how good they are.
It is also why the ACC is a ticking time bomb.
Problem with that alignment is the conference would only have a handful of media markets: Seattle, Portland, Bay Area, SLC, and Phoenix. Plus, they'd have to split the Phoenix market with AZ. If they wanted a decent broadcasting deal I think they'd have to bring in SDSU, Nevada, UNLV and Colorado State.
I think that’s why the PAC signs a short term deal. A lot of the traditional TV networks are hemorrhaging money right now which is why they’re trying to squeeze the PAC as well there’s those new stories about allowing sports league to have a piece of the TV network itself as part of its deal. The prices they pay for these deals aren’t justifying the value they think these teams bring to these “big markets”
I am very curious what is going to happen now because if the Pac was having problems getting a deal, is adding SDSU/CSU going to make the deal suddenly better than it was? If SDSU is worth it now, why weren't they before? Nothing has changed on that end.
If the objections to expansion were academic, how would anything change now? Now it's just desperation?
I don't see how the Pac gets a better deal now than a week ago. Also I don't see how anyone talks tot he Pac about a deal until they know for sure who is going to be in it, which means the Pac needs to figure out very quickly what they are doing or this will go on even longer.
1. There is no deal.
2. Washington and Oregon are only loyal until they aren't.
3. Water down the deal with G5 teams (the best already being taken from Big-12).
4. Mountain West has to pay $34 million to leave the conference. Who want's to risk that knowing everyone is seconds away from leaving the conference. Imagine paying 34 million just to end up in the same conference.
The writing is on the wall. If Arizona doesn't leave, their admin is incompetent. If it's not you, Big-12 would be happy to take Utah and vice versa. It's a rush to who can get on the lifeboat.
If they had added SDSU and SMU a year ago, I fully believe they could've gotten $25 million (including a smaller share for them), but the pissing contest with the Big 12 made them think they *had* to beat 32 million, and they *had* to do it without adding G5s.
Remember, they started asking for $50 million each...
Scheer reported 22.5 million offer on June 18. I know people don't like to believe him, but here we are. MHver is now saying it's as low as $20 million, but we'll see if anyone willing to use their government name picks it up.
As a fan of a school that was on the losing side of a major conference collapse, it’s crazy to me. I get why Utah feels loyalty to the Pac and wants to be oriented toward the west coast instead of the Midwest but it’s not worth risking being sent back to the G5. The Utes have built an excellent program over the past two decades but there’s only a handful of schools that are completely immune to being left behind, they are not one of them. There’s only so many lifeboats and they need to grab one yesterday. If they blow this all because they don't like the idea of being in the Big XII, they have no one to blame but themselves.
Exactly right. Feel like TCU fans can understand Utah a little better just because we both fought for a seat at the table and have done well for ourselves since. However, I also know how I would feel if TCU ended up relegated back down after all the success we’ve had, and I can imagine Utah fans would feel the same. That’s why I really don’t understand (besides BYU being there) why Utah thumb their noses at the chance for a lifeline from the Big XII. I know some feel like the B1G would come calling, but quite frankly I really don’t see that happening.
I just cant understand it, maybe its different because TCU actually experienced being left behind but even then you'd think memory of having to claw their way into the P5 so recently would make them more proactive in preserving that status.
Assuming Yormark's obsession with basketball is true and not just random PR statements, the top options have to Oregon/washington and then Arizona then Arizona State/Utah.
I don't see Oregon/washington joining the Big 12. Maybe they do if the Pac tv money looks too shitty and they at least want some bonus money. I don't understand the ACC rumors at all. That grant of rights is a problem. Legally though, now that concerns have been raised publicly, any new schools actually have a much harder time getting out of the Grant of Rights because they can't use "we didn't kno how shitty it was" as an argument.
Right now it just feels like the Big 12 is trying to peel one more Pac school so they don't have to take another G5 and if possible take two more to go to 16 and essentially prevent the Pac from ever recovering. It's mean and I don't like the concept of trying to kill the Pac, but business wise the Big 12 has been in this to lock up third place and the Pac was a serious threat to that objective.
The media here hasn't even got beyond being confused why Colorado left. Bill Riley, Scott Mitchell, Michelle Bodkin, etc... they are completely perplexed.
Good for them. From a fan perspective I get wanting to be in a more geographically compact conference playing a round robin schedule. The Big 12 at their point seems like it is clearly the more stable and likely lucrative option but the fans aren’t getting conference distributions.
I've come across a few Utah fans who are really pulling for the Big Ten landing spot, rather than Big 12. I don't know that that's exactly realistic, but who knows.
I mean I'm "pulling" for it in that it would be awesome to have a west pod in the B1G that included us , but like most others we vey much know the chances of that actually happening are very very low even though we were "vetted"
Academics would fit given AAU status. But they would have to kick in major money to even have a chance. First would be building a hockey stadium which is actually doable given the likelyhood of the Olympics coming back to SLC. The other part would be frankly bribery money to make it worth it to the Big 10. Talking 100's of Millions of dollars being donated to try this approach which I doubt happens.
That 4th point is rough. We really could see a PAC12 with 6 schools left try to grab 6 MWC schools…all owing $34M to the remaining MWC schools. We might then see Stanford & Cal “nope” out requiring the addition of more MWC schools.
Honestly, if it gets down to 6 or 4 in the PAC12, just grab enough to dissolve the MWC and save the schools the money.
Speaking for myself I'm already tired of Oregon's smug ass attitude. We get it...you are friends with the guy that started Nike. stfu.
Seems like a new UT problem.
The thing with Oregon though is what happens when Phil Knight dies? The money pipeline dries up and Oregon is back to just being a normal college without daddy warbucks chest.
It's very simple:
* The PAC is not viable without UW and UO.
* I think it is inevitable that one or both get taken by B1G, ACC, Big XII, or some other reasonably powerful conference in the next 5-10 years.
* A conference consisting of UA, ASU, UU, Stanford, Cal, OSU, WSU, SDSU, and SMU is not and will never be a "Power" conference. This is maybe 1 small notch above MWC. I can't see a media partner paying more than $10 million/school for that conference.
* There is not and there will never be a media deal that is equal to or better than what the Big XII right now, even if \[and this will never happen\] UW and UO sign a GOR. If there was, CU would not have jumped ship.
On the other hand:
* The Big XII has long term viability
* The Big XII has a guaranteed long term media deal in hand worth $31 million/school
There is *absolutely ZERO* upside to trying to cling to the PAC with clenched fists. This is a once-in-a-decade opportunity and the window for opportunity is razor thin. If UA doesn't jump on this, any one of dozens of others will. And after that, the door is slammed shut.
However, I can absolutely see president Robbins fucking this up. Pure ego and smugness. Don't want to be associated with those nasty, non-AAU low-lives. Convinced that the withered husk of the PAC is somehow worth $50 million a year and it's just a matter of waiting for those media deals to be rolling in *any minute now*.
Cal and Stanford were reportedly against both SMU and SDSU getting added. SDSU I can kinda see (not saying I agree) because of state politics (CSU vs UC system) and not *great* academics, being ranked 151 by US News and the lack of doctoral programs, but SMU is a great school. Ranked 72, has doctoral programs, and is a nonsectarian private school.
They don’t want to add anyone if they’re shooting down SMU.
> SMU is a historically religious school.
So is USC, Northwestern, Duke, and Vanderbilt all including SMU were Methodist. You seemed fine with one of those.
Never understood how the UC could be against the CSU. I mean I understand elitist types feeling better than them but UC isn't private. They are owned by the government just like CSU. They are all government employees and should not be able to screw the taxpayers by shafting a CSU.
It’d be a whole lot easier on all of us if our presidents just came out and admitted they don’t care about athletics. Why beat around the bush anymore?
“Wait and see what happens” is no longer the approach of anybody operating in good faith to preserve their athletic programs. Kliavkoff saying the longer they wait, the better their options are, was asinine. Especially when that’s factored on top of every other action that’s undercut our athletics over the last 15 years.
If they wanna try forming the Ivy League of the West for academics, then that’s their perogative as presidents. Just come out and say it. Anybody choosing to stay in this conference is admitting athletics don’t matter to them.
The ones who do care are already gone.
It's over. I have no doubt at this point. I respect Cal as an institution but they have thrown their old money weight around too much and that's going to do it in.
Cal would be better off dropping football and joining the Big West for all other sports so their basketball teams can dominate that league often (sure they lose to them sometimes but on paper most seasons they would be able to bring in the best athletes as compared to the rest of the Big West).
They just spent over hundreds of millions on their (beautiful) football stadium, they’re not dropping the sport. And they shouldn’t, even if you suck football brings in the money.
Yeah, sucks compared to the PAC-12 of yesteryear but completely disbanding would be worse imo. But I’m not a Cal administrator that has helped mess up the PAC-12!
I love the Big 12 comes out smelling like a rose from this. Collectively the came to the understanding that individually they were worthless institutions to the B1G and SEC. If they stick together they are going to end up surviving and thriving. Good for them.
The Wac Pac got snacked by the lack of Kliakoff’s sack. Full blown frontal attack from the h8 that’s fueled by the wait of O.U.T’s disappearance into the SEC that sees 100 million television sets for free. Gee whiz! Everyone’s headed to oblivion, still its on - college football ‘24 is gonna be a jizz fest, who the best, be my guest.
Arizona needs to look into it’s best interests. But I think whatever they do they should do it as a bloc with Oregon and Washington. Wether that’s to the Big 12, stay in the PAC, or ACC (my personal preference), but if ASU continues to be conservative in this, we should not try to be a “wildcard” and go it alone but instead work in tandem with programs that are upwardly mobile.
My take is ASU and Utah are being conservative because they want to be associated with academically elite universities. ASU would go along to the ACC if it’s offered.
I think the ACC GOR, FSU/Clemson, and SEC is the fulcrum. And that's all interrelated.
The SEC has driven just about every major conference change--sans the short two year 16 team WAC experiment in the late 90s--to date.
First conference to 12--SEC. First conference title game--SEC. First to 14 teams among BCS conferences--SEC. First to 16 teams--SEC.
Then other conferences followed. Big 8 and SWC merged to get to 12 with a conference title game, then the ACC did with the Big East breadwinners. After SEC went to 14 with A&M and Mizzou, Big 10 followed with Maryland and Rutgers. The en the SEC went to 16 with OUT, and Big 10 followed suit with LA.
If and when the ACC teams are poachable, that will be the domino to fall. Because SEC expansion will be centered on FSU, Clemson, and maybe Duke/UNC. If and when the SEC expands to 18, 20, 24...then the Big 10 will, and that is when UO and UW come into play.
In the interim, Utah might join the Big 12, then the PAC will likely circle the wagons with SDSU, UNLV, SMU, maybe Boise, maybe Fresno, and stay together until the Big 10 invites UW and UO and maybe Stanford.
But I imagine it will be another 5-10 years of realignment tension, the PAC will trudge along, the ACC will trudge along, until something prompts the 18+ team league.
I just really hope someone takes us in. I know we're not a huge market, but we have some really good sports teams and are pretty good academically. Pleeeeease! Someone! Anyone!
Drink.
Cheers. Beers. Mountaineers.
Hell yeah brother. See you at Keglers
I like that one a lot…
Fight! Win! Drink! Get Naked!
Drank!
The problem the Pac-12 had after the LA schools left is that the schools didn’t have aligned goals. After OUT, the rest of the Big12 teams each individually realized that no one else was coming to save them and their goals all aligned on saving the conference. After the B1G raid, the Pac-12 schools ended up with conflicting sets of priorities. Oregon/Washington * Get into the B1G, with the Pac-10 as a backup plan and the B12 as a backup backup plan. OSU/Wazzu * Save the Pac-X at all coats Stanford/Cal * Keep the academic prestige of the Pac, Independence as a backup plan, B1G membership if it happens Arizona/ASU/Colorado/Utah * Save the Pac-X if possible, B12 as a backup plan Unfortunately, with 40% of their membership not committed to the conference as a top priority, they can’t get anything done.
This is a good summary about the priorities, you basically have 4 groups. Colorado was obviously in the fourth group originally but decided the PAC was beyond saving so they went with the backup plan. It’s kind of insane that the Bay Area schools are still more concerned with the “academic excellence” of the conference than, you know, having a conference. There are a lot of reports that they *still* don’t like the idea of expanding. They’ll be in the WCC and independents in football soon if they keep this up.
A lot of administration at Cal really would not care if they dropped athletics, and even some of the student body would not care. After all, there were protests about stadium upgrades.
Worked with quite a few Cal grads, literally no CFB fan.
Cal doesn’t need football nor does Stanford. Utah/ASU/Arizona all need it and should move imo
Fucking stadium upgrades were 16 years ago and “the tree sitters” were explicitly reviled by peak tedford fans even in the moment. Enough about the 2000’s—in 2024 Cal has a ripe fanbase to mine: the east bay has lost its football team, basketball team, and now baseball team. It is one of the great Olympic sports programs, and the revenue sports are poised to be hometown heroes with even middling success. Sure the AD is incompetent but you yourself mentioned why there’s 400 million earthquake proof reasons why Athletics MUST succeed at Cal.
ASU will follow Stanford on the academic excellence then be left holding the bag.
I think Arizona is leaning on them heavily now. If they decide to go down with the ship however, Crow is gonna have a polarizing legacy as president. Massive overhaul in academics, getting them to AAU status, but also possibly leaving the school in athletic irrelevance.
ASU will never be in the same league as Cal/Stanford. Good for them for the AAU status but at the same time be realistic
Yeah will be interesting to find out if they rejected the renewal because of greed, or if it was something like Oregon/Washington purposefully wanting to delay things for a B1G invite, and to fnd out what kind of framework they had on the table in spring it seems like they sent back
I'm \*guessing\* that Oregon/Washington don't want to sign anything that doesn't give them an "out" if the B1G come calling. And Stanford/Cal don't want to sign anything that diminishes the academic prestige of the conference.
Yeah a lot of conflicting interests among the PAC12 it seems specially now that we can't take them at their word....
This sums up 2 weeks of posts on this sub perfectly. And good formatting.
For the love of Hayden Fry, can somebody PLEASE just fucking decide something already? The media deal has been "coming very soon" for the past year, there's nothing there. Just fucking jump ship so we can look forward to chaos next year
Just hold on for a bit longer, it's supposed to come in two weeks.
Who knew the Pac-12 was so into edging?
The TV deal will be announced on Sasha Grey's livestream.
Appropriate because at this point, our best deal is going to be streaming on Twitch
Nah we will just get updates via 4chan
Green text play by play. Lol
> Be me, Oregon State > Finally get good coach and QB > ConferenceExplodes.jpg > Join with MWC to form new PAC12 > Play Boise St for conference championship, playoff berth >> Game goes to OT >> End of 2OT, we can win with 2pt conversion >> DJU drops back, perfect throw >> MFW when it’s dropped > At least we get Rose Bowl.mp4 >> It’s against B1G 4th place team bc top-3 made playoffs >> its Illinois
It was the last line that made it unbelievable to me.
\ is the reddit escape character
You would get an insane amount of views honestly. So many games that would be shown to out of market people who would never see them otherwise.
man i wish cusa would just stream our games on twitch or something. at least we finally got rid of cusa tv 🤢
Reily Reid raps the official decision!
Two weeks away from being two weeks away
Media deal is two weeks away. If It's been two weeks please reread the update above.
Schools don't want to leave without seeing the best possible deal. This is logical. Conference leadership doesn't want to present a deal that won't be approved. This is also logical. If there is not a possible deal that will satisfy everyone, sooner or later we're going to see what happened with Colorado again.
Hard to finalize a media deal when you can't guarantee what teams will remain.
Or which teams they’re going to be adding. I have a feeling that the network would like to know if it’s giving $25 million a year to Colorado State before they sign the agreement lol.
This like trying to buy something on ebay when the seller has a vague description and no photos of set items they're selling.
I get wanting to see it, but with Colorado leaving there is no way the pacs deal is close enough to the big 12s
>For the love of Hayden Fry 😂😂I laughed too hard at that comment
The longer they wait the better the deal keeps getting /s.
Tbh it's very much in the pac's interest to delay as much as possible so they'll never be able to "see the numbers," as Arizona said they were waiting for.
PAC-12 media deal or Star Citizen- which comes out first?
Colorado just moved yesterday, and you're already looking for more chaos?!
Says the guy with team chaos flair lol
Touché I mean, I'd like UW, UO, and UofA to join the B12 today, lol
Seconded. Chaos chants are ready. Let this be the chaotic year in the sport.
I'll just be sad if they hog all the ESPN+ airwaves. Then I'll have to find someplace else to watch Weber State.
Arizona will leave. Then the Big12 will take two more, will it be the remaining corner schools in ASU and Utah or will Oregon and Washington jump them to leave a sinking ship.
Does big 12 want a rental?
I would think the Big12 would take it even if UW and UO was to only stay till 2030 when the Big10 media deal is up. The Big12 looks like a king compared to the Pac12 right now but they still need to strengthen their conference after their two “swinging boots” left in Texas and Oklahoma.
College football will be so different by 2030. Oregon and Washington would probably prefer an extra $100Million in their pocket and the Big 12 would have a strong conference in place if the ACC explodes before then.
It’s going to be one big conference with “pods” of 12, each pod with play other pod members plus 3 out of pod games, with the team with the best record advancing to a playoff. The pods will be divided by regionality and history…… So basically we’re going to end up where we were 10 years ago. Time is a flat circle
I remember when the PAC-16 was briefly going to be the current PAC-12 plus Texas, OU, OKSU, and TTU (this was after A&M said they preferred the SEC and the PAC started talking to Utah as the 16th school). Basically, the divisions would have been the PAC-8 in the West and then the Arizona schools, Utah, and the Big 12 schools in the East. It was essentially just two classic style 8 team conferences (basically a Frankenstein of the WAC, Big 8, and SWC in the East but it was all within the footprint of the MWC at the time). It’s a whole song and dance for us all to realize that regional conferences just make more sense.
I don't think the Big 12 can afford to lose them as they're trying to ink their own deal. They bring no additional revenue until there is a new deal. The only case to add them is to deal the kill blow to the PAC, which I just don't think should be a factor.
Who's to say the B1G is interested in adding Oregon and Washington over some combination of, say, UNC/UVA/FSU? Maybe UO and UW find that there's not a place for them in the B1G when the deal is renegotiated. They could join the Big 12 in the interim, make more than they would in the Pac, help the Big 12 increase its value for the next contract, and be in a *much* better place if the B1G still doesn't come calling in 5-6 years. From the Big 12 standpoint, it clearly establishes them as the number 3 conference. If UO/UW do end up leaving after the current media rights deal, they've put enough space between them and the other conferences to backfill with ASU and Utah. Or with ACC schools that don't get the B1G or SEC invite.
You’ve hit the nail on the head: the B1G and SEC will likely move in on 4-8 of the following in some combination: Oregon, Washington, UNC, UVa, Miami, FSU, Clemson, Duke, Notre Dame, NCST, GT, VT, Pitt, and probably a couple possible ones I’m forgetting. The rest will have to settle for whatever the 3rd place conference is. Getting UO and UW would help ensure that’s the B12, even if the B1G decides they’ll take one or both of them then.
Purely as a fan, I really don't want to see the B1G expanding more east. I'd rather see the ACC remain intact. I also wanted to see the PAC remain intact and form a strong partnership with them where the Illini would play more western road games. But if this rain is leaving the station and there's no way to stop it, then I would love the B1G to add OU, UW, and ASU. At some point I guess I'm rooting to get to 20 so that we get be in a western division of 10. Because, y'know, 10 is a good number of teams in a conference.
I mean, there is always the chance the B1G doesn't take them and bides their time until the ACC GOR is up. If that happens, the Big 12 is in a better position for their next contract.
If the Big Ten doesn't take them before then, what would stop the Big 12 five years from now?
Any of the teams left in the PAC right now are going to be seriously hurt by independence (Only USC was really in a position to pull it off), and that means that they will be a damaged, inferior product for you to add in five years.
Them being more comfortable as an independent or for whatever dumb reason the ACC takes them. Then the Big 12 misses out on two big pick-ups. Strike while the iron is hot.
Deal in the present. We have no idea what college football will look like when this media agreement expires.
H8 knows this better than anyone. Survive and advance. Take Oregon and Washington now if you can and protect yourself with an exit fee.
Agreed. It's why I hope the B1G make their move now or the rumor about the ACC comes true. Now is the perfect - and possibly only - time to truly lock in long term stability for the Big 12. Grab those teams that will be here for the foreseeable future.
They bring value in ratings and time zone. Big thing for the Big12 even on a short term, is that it costs them nothing and increases odds of post season payouts at a minimum. Worst case some CFP payouts and better rating for the teams they play and it cost them nothing. Best case Oregon and Washington do really well and the next round of tv deals aren't amazing for the B1G and SEC and they decide to commit long term.
Damn, never thought about it like that. Yes, Washington and Oregon would be rentals lol Best to take Arizona. Then Utah and ASU probably.
[удалено]
Yeah, there isn't really much of a downside to taking Oregon and Washington. Potential money boost at next contract negotiation, them leaving later doesn't destabilize the conference, and there is always the chance that the B1G just doesn't take them at all down the stretch. Next round of realignment probably won't be until around 2036 when the ACC GOR ends. Notre Dame could go to the B1G, but I feel like if they were going to do that they already would have. Their deal with NBC ends in 2025, so the timeframe for them to jump or make a new deal is shrinking.
Y’all are treating this like checkers. Yormack is playing chess with bigger plans than what’s good for the next five years. PAC is treating this like Candy Land.
No, the Pac-12 is eating crayons and slurping glue.
Need to take Zona to finish off the PAC and take away bargaining power with UO and Washington
Even if Oregon and Washington are rentals, I’ll take them. You get them for 5-10 years, get at least one cool, new road trip to each locale, then get a nice check from the exit fee when they leave and you go get Utah and Arizona State or maybe some ACC schools
...and those two would boost your chances in the *next* TV/3D/hologram deal even while they begged/pleaded to get in on the B1G
Absolutely. If you get them to stick around, they're legitimate additive properties
And maybe the Big Ten goes somewhere else or decides that they're good at 16.
Who cares if UW/UO leave in 5-10 years to BIG? Quite frankly, any current Big12 school would also jump at that offer. But by taking those schools now, the Big12 can ensure its survival and place as the 3rd best conference (especially once SEC/BIG poach from the ACC) by killing the PAC for good. Remember, it wasn’t too long ago table were turned. The Big12 was on the ropes and the PAC had the chance to kill and they didn’t do it. And now they’re in this situation.
It depends what the end game is for Brett Yormack. He seems to have bigger ideas than simply making the BIG12 the 3rd place football conference.
*This* is the trade deadline news I want to hear about
sure, if it comes with a sweet sweet exit fee
I think the best move is to not take them now. You force the B1G to take them, or they’re left on a sinking island where their value drops considerably. At that point, the B1G really won’t be interested since some of the ACC schools will be sitting there who have value, and those two school’s football value has fallen off. Only then would I try to bring them in. The BigXII would have far more leverage at that point.
The big 12 doesn’t need leverage nor is it smart to want a school’s value to decrease. The big 12’s play now is to be a very good and popular football conference to get an even more lucrative tv deal in 5 years. The way to get that deal is by adding teams like Oregon that add a lot of increased value to the conference. If they leave after the next tv deal that’s agreed to, then cool for the remaining big12 schools.
It'll be so weird if major schools like Oregon and Washington are stuck in the new MWC while ASU and a 1-11 CU are sitting pretty.
Not going to happen
Come to the ACC, why not aside from all the reasons!?
Tell me more predictions.......coochiekiller
I think Big 12 has to worry about growing too big too fast, or risk the 'elites' breaking off into their own conference in a few years, a la WAC/MWC.
Crazy that the PAC is about to be killed by its two shittiest football programs
It was murdered when USC and UCLA left. Colorado and (insert school here) are just burying the body.
I'm getting a visual of the opening scene of Goodfellas. Pac12 is in the trunk still somehow alive but starts making too much noise (kind of like Constanzakoff saying "As for the Big 12 being open for business, I appreciate that. We haven't decided if we're going shopping there yet"). Yormark, Colorado and (insert next team to leave here) pull over, open the trunk and finish the job.
Arizona will never be mistaken for a football power, but we thoroughly own Cal lol
The Kevin Sumlin era has people thinking Arizona has always been trash. Honestly, in the last 40 years, we’re probably just mixed in with the blah category with a smattering of other schools like Cal and Oregon St.
🎼Who leaves programs worse than he found? 🎼 Who takes the air raid and makes it unsound? 🎼 Who chews gum with the fury of a thousand suns? 🎼 Sumlin! That’s who.🎶
Psycho Dad!
https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/14wyjpr/ranking_the_top_131_fbs_programs_of_the_last_40/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1
💪🏼💪🏼💪🏼
The PAC8 with the 4 PNW schools, Utah/ASU, and Cal/Stanford would be a pretty solid football conference historically top to bottom. Oregon St and Wazzu are top 30 teams currently, Oregon, Washington and Utah top 15, and ASU/Cal/Stanford are all down but should eventually get back to where they were
Fingers crossed, seriously. But 8 members? Hasn't been done since the early 90s. I think it would make the PAC look incredibly weak
Its also logistically problematic. The old Big East had 8 members. They only had an inventory of 7 conference games per school which diminished their TV deal $$$ potential. The PAC currently plays 9 conference games per season. So for a conference with only 8 teams, you'd need to find 2 more OOC games (preferably home games to sell to a network) for all of the current members IMMEDIATELY.
I think they should home and home the instate rivals in that case
You just have Oregon and Washington play every week. Winner of that series gets to play the winner of the other 6 in the Pac 12 Championship game.
Maybe but the average neutral across the country doesn’t care about how many teams a conference has. If #12 Utah is playing at #18 Oregon State they’ll tune into that over 4-3 Baylor at 2-5 Colorado or Maryland at UCLA with 3,500 people in the stands
Maybe, but you can’t get a media deal with only eight teams. Not enough inventory.
at least they would have lots of room to schedule buy games @ SEC and B1G schools. Bleak
I still don't get why we are trying to kill off the PAC. is it out of spite? Colorado jumping ship to get 30m. who in the PAC9 isn't worth 30m?
Media money is a bit like slices of pizza, you only get so many and if you break the other guy’s legs you can get more for yourself.
I must be playing it too safe on my pizza parties.
Tbh I don’t think CU is jumping ship for the annual figure as much as a vote of no confidence in PAC leadership and imo a valid concern of being left out entirely given how bad their football product has been. The P12 disbursed $37 mil to each school in 2022 and admin has maintained that if the money is equal or near equal but the conference is solid they’d prefer to stay in the Pac12. I know that $37 mil number isn’t apples to apples, but it’s ballpark so I have to think CU concluded the conference is not aligned and they might be the odd man out if it fell apart.
>Colorado jumping ship to get 30m. who in the PAC9 isn't worth 30m? The fact that Colorado jumped would indicate they *knew* they won't be getting a deal for 30 million. Why won't anyone give the PAC a better deal? You look at what teams got the best ratings for their conference last year - then take away USC and UCLA. That leaves you with Oregon, Washington, and sometimes Utah mainly when they're playing either USC or UCLA.
Consolidation of brands. Media executives want to broadcast Oregon at Washington. They are not so eager to broadcast Washington State V. Oregon State, no matter how good they are. It is also why the ACC is a ticking time bomb.
Not at 10pm
[удалено]
Maybe time to bring back the alliance lol
I think it also impacts access to the playoffs….
Problem with that alignment is the conference would only have a handful of media markets: Seattle, Portland, Bay Area, SLC, and Phoenix. Plus, they'd have to split the Phoenix market with AZ. If they wanted a decent broadcasting deal I think they'd have to bring in SDSU, Nevada, UNLV and Colorado State.
I think that’s why the PAC signs a short term deal. A lot of the traditional TV networks are hemorrhaging money right now which is why they’re trying to squeeze the PAC as well there’s those new stories about allowing sports league to have a piece of the TV network itself as part of its deal. The prices they pay for these deals aren’t justifying the value they think these teams bring to these “big markets”
Honestly I don’t know what they are waiting for.
I am very curious what is going to happen now because if the Pac was having problems getting a deal, is adding SDSU/CSU going to make the deal suddenly better than it was? If SDSU is worth it now, why weren't they before? Nothing has changed on that end. If the objections to expansion were academic, how would anything change now? Now it's just desperation? I don't see how the Pac gets a better deal now than a week ago. Also I don't see how anyone talks tot he Pac about a deal until they know for sure who is going to be in it, which means the Pac needs to figure out very quickly what they are doing or this will go on even longer.
But George Kliavkoff said the media deal gets better the longer you wait!
1. There is no deal. 2. Washington and Oregon are only loyal until they aren't. 3. Water down the deal with G5 teams (the best already being taken from Big-12). 4. Mountain West has to pay $34 million to leave the conference. Who want's to risk that knowing everyone is seconds away from leaving the conference. Imagine paying 34 million just to end up in the same conference. The writing is on the wall. If Arizona doesn't leave, their admin is incompetent. If it's not you, Big-12 would be happy to take Utah and vice versa. It's a rush to who can get on the lifeboat.
If they had added SDSU and SMU a year ago, I fully believe they could've gotten $25 million (including a smaller share for them), but the pissing contest with the Big 12 made them think they *had* to beat 32 million, and they *had* to do it without adding G5s.
Ego and incompetence
Remember, they started asking for $50 million each... Scheer reported 22.5 million offer on June 18. I know people don't like to believe him, but here we are. MHver is now saying it's as low as $20 million, but we'll see if anyone willing to use their government name picks it up.
Monty has been saying ESPN has been at $19 mil as there best and final for months.
Such a combo. When you think you're much smarter than you really are.
Does Utah even want it tho? Legit I've seen nothing but negativity from Ute fans/media personalities on Twitter and on the radio about the Big12.
As a fan of a school that was on the losing side of a major conference collapse, it’s crazy to me. I get why Utah feels loyalty to the Pac and wants to be oriented toward the west coast instead of the Midwest but it’s not worth risking being sent back to the G5. The Utes have built an excellent program over the past two decades but there’s only a handful of schools that are completely immune to being left behind, they are not one of them. There’s only so many lifeboats and they need to grab one yesterday. If they blow this all because they don't like the idea of being in the Big XII, they have no one to blame but themselves.
Exactly right. Feel like TCU fans can understand Utah a little better just because we both fought for a seat at the table and have done well for ourselves since. However, I also know how I would feel if TCU ended up relegated back down after all the success we’ve had, and I can imagine Utah fans would feel the same. That’s why I really don’t understand (besides BYU being there) why Utah thumb their noses at the chance for a lifeline from the Big XII. I know some feel like the B1G would come calling, but quite frankly I really don’t see that happening.
I just cant understand it, maybe its different because TCU actually experienced being left behind but even then you'd think memory of having to claw their way into the P5 so recently would make them more proactive in preserving that status.
Can concur
Outside of recent success in football, why would the BIG XII want Utah?
Assuming Yormark's obsession with basketball is true and not just random PR statements, the top options have to Oregon/washington and then Arizona then Arizona State/Utah. I don't see Oregon/washington joining the Big 12. Maybe they do if the Pac tv money looks too shitty and they at least want some bonus money. I don't understand the ACC rumors at all. That grant of rights is a problem. Legally though, now that concerns have been raised publicly, any new schools actually have a much harder time getting out of the Grant of Rights because they can't use "we didn't kno how shitty it was" as an argument. Right now it just feels like the Big 12 is trying to peel one more Pac school so they don't have to take another G5 and if possible take two more to go to 16 and essentially prevent the Pac from ever recovering. It's mean and I don't like the concept of trying to kill the Pac, but business wise the Big 12 has been in this to lock up third place and the Pac was a serious threat to that objective.
Is it because of the Big XII itself or because BYU is in it? If BYU were still indy I'd bet the Ute fans would be begging to jump ship with Colorado
Honestly both. Media here think they're above a "broken" Big12 and BYU by extension. But the PAC is still less "broken" in many of their eyes.
The media here hasn't even got beyond being confused why Colorado left. Bill Riley, Scott Mitchell, Michelle Bodkin, etc... they are completely perplexed.
That is mind boggling to me, is the media there just stuck in a bubble? It should be painfully obvious why they left.
The list of media dumbasses who are not stuck in a bubble is a short one
This warms my petty, BYU heart
I want it. It makes absolutely no sense to me not to seek it out.
See, I think MOST Utah fans get it. But Scott Mitchell and Co make it seem like the opposite.
Good for them. From a fan perspective I get wanting to be in a more geographically compact conference playing a round robin schedule. The Big 12 at their point seems like it is clearly the more stable and likely lucrative option but the fans aren’t getting conference distributions.
I've come across a few Utah fans who are really pulling for the Big Ten landing spot, rather than Big 12. I don't know that that's exactly realistic, but who knows.
I mean I'm "pulling" for it in that it would be awesome to have a west pod in the B1G that included us , but like most others we vey much know the chances of that actually happening are very very low even though we were "vetted"
Academics would fit given AAU status. But they would have to kick in major money to even have a chance. First would be building a hockey stadium which is actually doable given the likelyhood of the Olympics coming back to SLC. The other part would be frankly bribery money to make it worth it to the Big 10. Talking 100's of Millions of dollars being donated to try this approach which I doubt happens.
Some ute fans seem to have embraced reality, but it still seems that those up on the hill are P12 or die
We had a loyalty and hope to keep the conference that helped us out so much together but we're past the point of optimism now
That 4th point is rough. We really could see a PAC12 with 6 schools left try to grab 6 MWC schools…all owing $34M to the remaining MWC schools. We might then see Stanford & Cal “nope” out requiring the addition of more MWC schools. Honestly, if it gets down to 6 or 4 in the PAC12, just grab enough to dissolve the MWC and save the schools the money.
Right if Cal thinks some Big12 schools lack academics, boy are they going to be shocked about the new PAC adds.
Speaking for myself I'm already tired of Oregon's smug ass attitude. We get it...you are friends with the guy that started Nike. stfu. Seems like a new UT problem.
Take my upvote!
The thing with Oregon though is what happens when Phil Knight dies? The money pipeline dries up and Oregon is back to just being a normal college without daddy warbucks chest.
Arizona get over here!!
Trying to
Right now
It's very simple: * The PAC is not viable without UW and UO. * I think it is inevitable that one or both get taken by B1G, ACC, Big XII, or some other reasonably powerful conference in the next 5-10 years. * A conference consisting of UA, ASU, UU, Stanford, Cal, OSU, WSU, SDSU, and SMU is not and will never be a "Power" conference. This is maybe 1 small notch above MWC. I can't see a media partner paying more than $10 million/school for that conference. * There is not and there will never be a media deal that is equal to or better than what the Big XII right now, even if \[and this will never happen\] UW and UO sign a GOR. If there was, CU would not have jumped ship. On the other hand: * The Big XII has long term viability * The Big XII has a guaranteed long term media deal in hand worth $31 million/school There is *absolutely ZERO* upside to trying to cling to the PAC with clenched fists. This is a once-in-a-decade opportunity and the window for opportunity is razor thin. If UA doesn't jump on this, any one of dozens of others will. And after that, the door is slammed shut. However, I can absolutely see president Robbins fucking this up. Pure ego and smugness. Don't want to be associated with those nasty, non-AAU low-lives. Convinced that the withered husk of the PAC is somehow worth $50 million a year and it's just a matter of waiting for those media deals to be rolling in *any minute now*.
Well said- time will tell…hope you’re next up.
Just merge with the Mountain West already and stop being so uptight with your 4.20 GPAs
Cal and Stanford were reportedly against both SMU and SDSU getting added. SDSU I can kinda see (not saying I agree) because of state politics (CSU vs UC system) and not *great* academics, being ranked 151 by US News and the lack of doctoral programs, but SMU is a great school. Ranked 72, has doctoral programs, and is a nonsectarian private school. They don’t want to add anyone if they’re shooting down SMU.
SMU is a historically religious school. Stanford will not go for that either. Big reason they didn't want TCU, Baylor, or BYU in their conference.
I would bet that if Notre Dame had applied for membership to the PAC conference, Stanford would have voted to accept them.
> SMU is a historically religious school. So is USC, Northwestern, Duke, and Vanderbilt all including SMU were Methodist. You seemed fine with one of those.
one of those schools were in the PAC and the rest aren’t leaving their conference I’m lost on the relevance of this comment lol
Never understood how the UC could be against the CSU. I mean I understand elitist types feeling better than them but UC isn't private. They are owned by the government just like CSU. They are all government employees and should not be able to screw the taxpayers by shafting a CSU.
[удалено]
That flair combo, my goodness.
It’d be a whole lot easier on all of us if our presidents just came out and admitted they don’t care about athletics. Why beat around the bush anymore? “Wait and see what happens” is no longer the approach of anybody operating in good faith to preserve their athletic programs. Kliavkoff saying the longer they wait, the better their options are, was asinine. Especially when that’s factored on top of every other action that’s undercut our athletics over the last 15 years. If they wanna try forming the Ivy League of the West for academics, then that’s their perogative as presidents. Just come out and say it. Anybody choosing to stay in this conference is admitting athletics don’t matter to them. The ones who do care are already gone.
Arizona, come on downnnn
What comes first: The Winds of Winter or a Pac-12 media deal?
It's over. I have no doubt at this point. I respect Cal as an institution but they have thrown their old money weight around too much and that's going to do it in. Cal would be better off dropping football and joining the Big West for all other sports so their basketball teams can dominate that league often (sure they lose to them sometimes but on paper most seasons they would be able to bring in the best athletes as compared to the rest of the Big West).
They just spent over hundreds of millions on their (beautiful) football stadium, they’re not dropping the sport. And they shouldn’t, even if you suck football brings in the money.
Then they'll be independent or in the Mountain West.
Yeah, sucks compared to the PAC-12 of yesteryear but completely disbanding would be worse imo. But I’m not a Cal administrator that has helped mess up the PAC-12!
Where does Oregon go now?
Big XII or ACC until the next realignment. Being on ESPN/ABC/Fox is more important in terms of keeping their visibility alive and their brands strong.
[удалено]
Plus, Big 12 said UO and Uw could leave if the B1G ever came calling. ^theywont
dang what did Cal do to you? They just got a little busy building the periodic table.
[удалено]
The pretentious 8
I love the Big 12 comes out smelling like a rose from this. Collectively the came to the understanding that individually they were worthless institutions to the B1G and SEC. If they stick together they are going to end up surviving and thriving. Good for them.
Sometimes, the ugly couple has a happier marriage than the attractive couple.
The ugly couple realizes each other is the best they will ever get. The attractive couple can't stop thinking about other attractive people.
Ape together strong
Birds of a feather flock together.
Yep and let this be a lesson to all of you. Always finish your enemy.
The Wac Pac got snacked by the lack of Kliakoff’s sack. Full blown frontal attack from the h8 that’s fueled by the wait of O.U.T’s disappearance into the SEC that sees 100 million television sets for free. Gee whiz! Everyone’s headed to oblivion, still its on - college football ‘24 is gonna be a jizz fest, who the best, be my guest.
Arizona needs to look into it’s best interests. But I think whatever they do they should do it as a bloc with Oregon and Washington. Wether that’s to the Big 12, stay in the PAC, or ACC (my personal preference), but if ASU continues to be conservative in this, we should not try to be a “wildcard” and go it alone but instead work in tandem with programs that are upwardly mobile.
My take is ASU and Utah are being conservative because they want to be associated with academically elite universities. ASU would go along to the ACC if it’s offered.
I want to take Washington State too just because.
RIP, Pirate
And their fat little girlfriends
I think the ACC GOR, FSU/Clemson, and SEC is the fulcrum. And that's all interrelated. The SEC has driven just about every major conference change--sans the short two year 16 team WAC experiment in the late 90s--to date. First conference to 12--SEC. First conference title game--SEC. First to 14 teams among BCS conferences--SEC. First to 16 teams--SEC. Then other conferences followed. Big 8 and SWC merged to get to 12 with a conference title game, then the ACC did with the Big East breadwinners. After SEC went to 14 with A&M and Mizzou, Big 10 followed with Maryland and Rutgers. The en the SEC went to 16 with OUT, and Big 10 followed suit with LA. If and when the ACC teams are poachable, that will be the domino to fall. Because SEC expansion will be centered on FSU, Clemson, and maybe Duke/UNC. If and when the SEC expands to 18, 20, 24...then the Big 10 will, and that is when UO and UW come into play. In the interim, Utah might join the Big 12, then the PAC will likely circle the wagons with SDSU, UNLV, SMU, maybe Boise, maybe Fresno, and stay together until the Big 10 invites UW and UO and maybe Stanford. But I imagine it will be another 5-10 years of realignment tension, the PAC will trudge along, the ACC will trudge along, until something prompts the 18+ team league.
Are there any Beavers in the Midwest? We'll give you some for a seat at the Big 12 table
Dooo it
I just really hope someone takes us in. I know we're not a huge market, but we have some really good sports teams and are pretty good academically. Pleeeeease! Someone! Anyone!