Saturday Tradition: Pac-12 commissioner gives insight on when Pac-12 will make realignment decision

[TopFrog]

Pac-12 commissioner gives insight on when Pac-12 will make realignment decision

Spenser Davis

The Pac-12 has a decision to make, and it will apparently make it soon.

Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff said on Friday that his conference will announce their conference realignment intentions — or lack thereof — “within a couple of weeks.”

That’s good news for college football fans who are hoping to wrap up this string of conference realignment sooner rather than later.

Read more at https://saturdaytradition.com/big-t...n-when-pac-12-will-make-realignment-decision/

 

[Bizarro Frog]

Short article that ends with TCU, Tech and Okie St as being good candidates for PAC 12 if they decide to expand.

 

[Hoosierfrog]

This doesn’t sound that promising…

Right now, the alliance is about philosophy, and the reality is that the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12, which prioritize academic profile and an expansive set of Olympic sports, don't overlap much with universities like West Virginia and TCU.

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...eaking-acc-big-ten-pac-12-alliance-comes-next

 

[Longhorn from Aledo]

This alliance is about killing the 12 team playoff. It will be about sending the champion from each of the 4 conferences. If this does indeed happen, then the remaining B12 teams will find a landing spot in the B1G, Pac, Acc. Also, the playoffs will technically begin at the pod or divisional elimination games within the conferences.

It's all about marginalizing the SEC's ability to stuff the playoff. While I think Texas will get much better in the future at football than it is now, it's going to be hard to make it to the final 4 playoff.

 

[CryptoMiner]

This doesn’t sound that promising…

Right now, the alliance is about philosophy, and the reality is that the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12, which prioritize academic profile and an expansive set of Olympic sports, don't overlap much with universities like West Virginia and TCU.

https://www.espn.com/college-footba...eaking-acc-big-ten-pac-12-alliance-comes-next

writers opinion not an official stance.

 

[AustinFrog]

UT-Austin will have to get much better in the future just to compete on the field with TCU. 7-2. Entering our 10th year in the Big 12, UT-Austin has twice as many head coaches (4) as wins vs. TCU (2).

 

[Limey Frog]

This alliance is about killing the 12 team playoff. It will be about sending the champion from each of the 4 conferences. If this does indeed happen, then the remaining B12 teams will find a landing spot in the B1G, Pac, Acc. Also, the playoffs will technically begin at the pod or divisional elimination games within the conferences.

It's all about marginalizing the SEC's ability to stuff the playoff. While I think Texas will get much better in the future at football than it is now, it's going to be hard to make it to the final 4 playoff.

Hopefully that's the case. This logic plus the benefit of a presence in the central time zone, along with a Big Ten scheduling allowance should all be very compelling. The question will be whether that logic is compelling enough to overwhelm the snobbery of admins in the bay area; those guys aren't exactly in touch with reality on any level, so I'm not holding out much hope.

One interesting feature here would be that if these three conferences can reorganize the playoff model around a field smaller than 12 with four autobids and limited at-large spots, they would create the only conditions capable of forcing Notre Dame into the ACC for football. Obviously the ACC wants that, and obviously it would be good news for WVU as well.

Could be a doomsday scenario for K-State, and potentially Baylor, too, if the Pac opted to pass them over in favor of Houston.

 

[Heardler]

writers opinion not an official stance.

Perhaps the writer should take a look at University academic rankings before making such an asinine comment... Oregon, Oregon St., Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Arizona St, Washington St. and Washington are all ranked lower than TCU in US News rankings for example. Some far, far lower.

 

[HG73]

UT-Austin will have to get much better in the future just to compete on the field with TCU. 7-2. Entering our 10th year in the Big 12, UT-Austin has twice as many head coaches (4) as wins vs. TCU (2).

I LIKE THIS. I LIKE THIS VERY MUCH.

 

[HG73]

Perhaps the writer should take a look at University academic rankings before making such an asinine comment... Oregon, Oregon St., Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Arizona St, Washington St. and Washington are all ranked lower than TCU in US News rankings for example. Some far, far lower.

Right. Are some of those AAU?

 

[helcap]

writers opinion not an official stance.

Interesting though that in the USNWR rankings mentioned previously TCU is ranked well ahead of Iowa State, and light years ahead of Texas Tech, OSU,Kansas, and KSU. Yet they chose us as one of their two examples with WVU who is ranked 161 spots lower than TCU.

 

[Nick Danger]

Right now, the alliance is about philosophy, and the reality is that the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12, which prioritize academic profile and an expansive set of Olympic sports, don't overlap much with universities like West Virginia and TCU.

Didn't think this guy's comment about the "Olympic sports" rang true either, so I did a little checking! Turns out he's wrong about that too. While Stanford, UCLA, Cal, and Arizona State all sponsor more sports teams than the 21 total that TCU has, every other PAC-12 team, besides USC which sponsors the same number, offers less "Olympic teams" than the Frogs (not counting our National Championship Bass Fishing squad!). I'd say that overlaps pretty G-darn well!

Just for the heck of it, I went back and checked to see how some of the other Big-12 teams, that are often mentioned as possible PAC-12 "recruits" fared in this area . . .
While TCU offers a total of 21 sports teams, Texas Tech offers a total of 15 such units, Baylor sponsors 17, Oklahoma State has a "robust" 14, Iowa State has 16, Kansas State, a paltry 12, and the University of Houston offers 15!
And in regards to the aforementioned West Virginia, they only sponsor 17!
For what it's worth!

 

[froglash88]

PAC12 and add softball? Maybe that’s how we end up adding softball.

 

[Eight]

Didn't think this guy's comment about the "Olympic sports" rang true either, so I did a little checking! Turns out he's wrong about that too. While Stanford, UCLA, Cal, and Arizona State all sponsor more sports teams than the 21 total that TCU has, every other PAC-12 team, besides USC which sponsors the same number, offers less "Olympic teams" than the Frogs (not counting our National Championship Bass Fishing squad!). I'd say that overlaps pretty G-darn well!

Just for the heck of it, I went back and checked to see how some of the other Big-12 teams, that are often mentioned as possible PAC-12 "recruits" fared in this area . . .
While TCU offers a total of 21 sports teams, Texas Tech offers a total of 15 such units, Baylor sponsors 17, Oklahoma State has a "robust" 14, Iowa State has 16, and Kansas State, a paltry 12!
And in regards to the aforementioned West Virginia, they only sponsor 17!
For what it's worth!

bit of slight of hand from tcu in how they list teams and sports as the frogs don't truly sponsor 21 DIFFERENT sports.

example, tcu claims they offer indoor and outdoor track for men and women. first, indoor track is a separate season and not a separate sport and for most schools they are the same rosters.

you don't see the frogs list they have an indoor tennis team and an outdoor tennis team so the listing for track makes no sense

second, if you look at usc their track program shows that one of their track assistants oversees their cross country program and if you were to look at their roster of their distance runners you would find that their distance people also run the cross country season. additionally, the scholarship limits for cross country and track are included from the same total.

using the frogs method of counting then usc offers 25 different sports and not 21.

using that same criteria washington offers 22 different sports,

third, two of the sports the frogs offer are rifle and equestrian. only 17 division 1 programs compete in rifle and 24 in equestrian. we all know why tcu offers those two as scholarship sports

 

[HG73]

bit of slight of hand from tcu in how they list teams and sports as the frogs don't truly sponsor 21 DIFFERENT sports.

example, tcu claims they offer indoor and outdoor track for men and women. first, indoor track is a separate season and not a separate sport and for most schools they are the same rosters.

you don't see the frogs list they have an indoor tennis team and an outdoor tennis team so the listing for track makes no sense

second, if you look at usc their track program shows that one of their track assistants oversees their cross country program and if you were to look at their roster of their distance runners you would find that their distance people also run the cross country season. using the frogs method of counting then usc offers 25 different sports and not 21

using that same criteria washington offers 22 different sports,

third, two of the sports the frogs offer are rifle and equestrian. only 17 division 1 programs compete in rifle and 24 in equestrian. we all know why tcu offers those two as scholarship sports

Why?

 

[Eight]

Why?

cheap way to satisfy the scholarship requirements of title ix

aside from the costs of attendance i really doubt the budget for the rifle team is much as well as the equestrian team.

very same reason tcu added beach volleyball the last time they added a sport

compare those costs to say sponsoring softball, water polo, or gymnastics

 

[dawg]

TCU’s USNWR (#80) ranking would put it 6th in the PAC. We aren’t AAU, but neither are ASU (103),Oregon St (153), or Washington St (173)

Arizona (USNWR #97), Utah (#97), Colorado (#103) and Oregon (#103) are below us but are all AAU.

Writer didn’t do his homework if he thinks we aren’t a good academic school.

 

[Longhorn from Aledo]

Hopefully that's the case. This logic plus the benefit of a presence in the central time zone, along with a Big Ten scheduling allowance should all be very compelling. The question will be whether that logic is compelling enough to overwhelm the snobbery of admins in the bay area; those guys aren't exactly in touch with reality on any level, so I'm not holding out much hope.

One interesting feature here would be that if these three conferences can reorganize the playoff model around a field smaller than 12 with four autobids and limited at-large spots, they would create the only conditions capable of forcing Notre Dame into the ACC for football. Obviously the ACC wants that, and obviously it would be good news for WVU as well.

Could be a doomsday scenario for K-State, and potentially Baylor, too, if the Pac opted to pass them over in favor of Houston.

Yes, IMO this alliance will be about marginalizing the SEC. In order to do this, they will all have to go to 16 teams per conference otherwise they risk not being included. For TV money, 4 pods per 16 team conference make for a very nice tournament of 16 teams. This would start with a 4 team playoff within each conference and end in a 4 team playoff of the champions of each conference. This would not allow the SEC to "pack the playoff" and force a more structural outcome on the SEC. They won't be able to pack the decision committee with lackeys in ESPN's back pocket. I think this would be good for college football.

 

[Bizarro Frog]

If I had to a place a bet in Vegas on it I think it would end up being TCU, Tech, OK St and Houston if they expand into TX. I feel like Baylor’s only shot at Power 4 is if the ACC panics and just grabs what left over in TX because the PAC 12 and SEC would own TX.

I just don’t think KSU and Iowa St have a lot to offer. No recruiting and middle of no where. Baylor gets a check for recruiting and Fixer Upper but no direct flights, intolerant and bad reputation. I think those 3 schools should be the most worried. I don’t know if Kansas cares enough about football to care. W Vir fits with ACC geography but academics don’t. A wild card would be the ACC adding W Vir and Cincy then they could have the Old Keg of Nails quad with Pitt and Louisville.

 

[Big Frog II]

TCU’s USNWR (#80) ranking would put it 6th in the PAC. We aren’t AAU, but neither are ASU (103),Oregon St (153), or Washington St (173)

Arizona (USNWR #97), Utah (#97), Colorado (#103) and Oregon (#103) are below us but are all AAU.

Writer didn’t do his homework if he thinks we aren’t a good academic school.

Lots of writers these days don't do their homework.