Or TCU for that matter 10 years ago
Big 12 Expansion
- Thread starter DelFrog
- Start date
The Group of 5 (BYU, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado State, New Mexico) were long time rivals. Those days are long gone but that's how it was in the 1990s.
Zero chance the Pac poaches anyone other than G5s.
Limey Frog
Full Member
Please don't tell a bunch of TCU fans there's zero chance that all the programs in our conference who make it worth being there are going to leave together for another one and strand us in hell with Rice. There's always a chance of that.
It has this funny way of recurring.
Eight
Member
go find longhorn in aledo and you two can play conference killers together
Purp
Active Member
That's the way it seems with the little bit of information leaking out through the media. Just leads me to believe the B12 could make a move if it wants after the PAC waiting period ends. If that doesn't happen then nothing will. I don't think nothing happens, though. Too many programs in the PAC will be looking over their shoulders for Brutus if they stay so they'll want the B12 lifeline if it exists.
TCUdirtbag
Active Member
Yeah, I don't get how at least one of the 4 corners schools doesn't jump for the greater Big 12 $ and create a domino effect that lead the others to follow. Question would then seem to be whether or not UW and UO follow or not.
We can pretend there's some high and mighty academics/rankings reason to hold the PAC together, but if your Pac-# expansion candidates include Boise State, San Diego State, and Fresno State, you might as well join up with Houston, Tech, OK State, etc. They're playing in the same academics baby pool, but the Big 12's are at least athletically relevant (and you can make a decent argument that the mid-America land grants have their own academic/research cache). We can also pretend geography matters, but again if your Pac-# expansion candidates include SMU and New Mexico, you might as well join up with Texas, mid-South, and midwest programs that are--again--athletically relevant (especially if you're looking at pods/divisions that keep you with CO, UT, AZ, etc., anyway). The only hangups I see with the 4 corners are weird presidents/boards doing weird things that don't make financial or survival sense but "feel" better. In UO/UW's case, they could opt to hang in with their land grant state partners for a cycle and hope for a B1G/SEC invite and revisit in 5-10 years. But if you look around and it's Washington, Wazzu, Oregon, OSU, Cal, and Stanford, what 6 are you seriously going to grab---SDSU, Boise, Fresno, CSU, SMU, and UNM? Not a bad league, but if you're UO/UW you ought to think about jumping into the Big 12 instead.
Last edited:
HornyWartyToad
Active Member
I saw a column today by a PAC writer suggesting they keep the conference together by holding their nose and going after SDSU and BYU. Another couple of stories indicate that the discussions between PAC and B12 about merging are dead. So, I sure hope we can poach at least a couple of them before the next shoe drops nationally.
Limey Frog
Full Member
I could certainly see ESPN throwing enough money at the Pac to keep them together, like they did for the Big XII in 2011, if ESPN decides that they need the west coast enough. I still can't see Oregon or UW signing anything that locks them in long-term, and I don't know why the 'four corners' schools wouldn't look elsewhere if their conference's most important members refuse to commit to it fully. If those schools did jump (which is already so many contingent moves into a chain of unpredictable events), I wonder whether Oregon and UW wouldn't just go independent. Unless something comes through with the ACC (which seems to me to offer too little to the ACC for it to work), what else can Oregon do that could both increase their revenue share and leave them free to join the Big Ten if things change?
[Regarding the ACC-Pac 10 thing: the Pac isn't worth more than $30M/yr per school now, "industry sources" say. That's how much the ACC is getting until 2036, and that contract can't be redrawn without Clemson and FSU bolting, apparently. But if you could generate additional revenue without altering the ACC contract maybe Oregon, UW, Clemson, FSU, and Miami would be happier... But they're looking at the SEC and Big Ten making $100M/yr each, so what do they need to get to? $50M-$70M/yr? Are some extra non-conference matchups going to generate $100M/yr? Even if they did, are the other league members on each side going to agree to all of that money going only to five schools? If it doesn't go to them, they won't be satisfied by the deal and it's pointless; if it does, why would the other league members put up with it? Unequal revenue share arrangements have a long history of ending in tears. Also, I don't know if any league has ever gone from equal to unequal, though a few have, I think, gone from unequal to equal. I just can't see how the ACC-Pac thing can be arranged to the satisfaction of all concerned parties. Obviously I'm just a dude on a message board, so there's very likely something I don't know here. We'll find out eventually, I guess...]
Oddly enough, the biggest thing the Big 12 has going for it is that none of the other major conferences seem to want any of its programs.
JogginFrog
Active Member
And we appreciate you ticking off the UTEP/El Paso folks to the extent that they looked past 8-3 Wyoming and 8-4 CSU to invite 6-5 TCU to the Sun Bowl to play USC in '98. Those days may be long gone, but it doesn't mean they were insignificant.
82 Frog Fever
Active Member
Are you still here? You’re way beyond starting to look pathetic.
There must be a BYU fan board somewhere that will tolerate your ramblings.
Jefffrog1993
KMA
I think Pac teams are waiting to see what the new deal would pay them. If it sucks and it will suck then they will join the Big 12. If their deal is better than the Big 12’s then some of our teams may jump to the Pac. If any team in Big 12 or Pac gets an invite to SEC or Big 10 they will be gone so fast you won’t see them move.
I think the ACC and Big 12 could make way more money together simply due to start times staying in East Coast and Central times mostly. Somehow mix in Norte Dame and that third conference can make close to SEC and Big 10 money. Pac left behind as a distant fourth conference. If Pac and ACC marry up then Big 12 tenants will be the suck conference.
I think the ACC and Big 12 could make way more money together simply due to start times staying in East Coast and Central times mostly. Somehow mix in Norte Dame and that third conference can make close to SEC and Big 10 money. Pac left behind as a distant fourth conference. If Pac and ACC marry up then Big 12 tenants will be the suck conference.
gohornedfrogs
Tier 1
He redeemed himself by not typing irregardless in the last sentence.
Purp
Active Member
Yeah, the only way I see the PAC holding together is if the additional revenue to be gained from the B12 less than the additional costs of competing for the schools under consideration. Even then, that gap would have to be substantial because there is an enormous amount of risk for traditionally risk-averse university presidents to opt for an obviously far less stable situation for one obviously more stable.
Ultimately, I think Colorado and one of the Arizona schools are the first to jump and, after that, there's not enough left in the PAC for the others to stay. U Dub and Oregon are in interesting situations and the independent route for them might be plausible (same for Stanford), but I think they'll be wanting some stability too and I think the prospect of a potential B1G invite will be sufficiently dead for them to hold out and resist a B12 invite.
We'll see; I just think nothing happening feels very unlikely at this point.
I think if Oregon and Washington decide to go the Independent route their program stock will decline rapidly, and chances of that Big 10 invite will become slimmer by the year.
Bizarro Frog
Active Member
Good thing about the BIG 12 is most of the programs have tasted success (even Kansas) at one point and want to sustain it or get back to it. The Basketball has become 2nd to none but Football drives the boat and most every program will do whatever it can to stay relevant. I am not sure the ACC or PAC 12 can claim that. Sometimes a never say die and give 'em hell attitude wins out and the BIG 12 schools have shown plenty of that. They could have folded or limped off into obscurity with TX and OU left but they rallied and got stronger. Not saying if the SEC or B1G comes calling programs won't leave but until then they will fight for their place at the table and not sit back and hope someone rescues them.
froginmn
Full Member
If they also took Baylor this might be a perfect scenario.
Prime BEEF
Active Member
If the pac is trying to survive, they have to be aggressive and expand before getting poached and killed off. To me, need to go after SDSU, BYU, UNLV, Hawaii. No way Ok State, TT, KU or TCU join or want to join the Pac w/o the LA market.
westoverhillbilly
Active Member
Without thinking about each of the schools' contractual obligations to their leagues and the tv viewers, I still wonder if some back door/chickengrunt move by a network or dismayed ADs/Univ Presidents may occur where semi-dead weight and/or those too far east (UCF, Cincy & WVU) are shed from both the Big 12 and leftover PAC to form a conference minus perhaps the PAC land grants of OSU & WSU and maybe UH and KU. Footballwise, I think the remainder are decent programs with decent attendance and fan bases, not that WVU and Cincy aren't- this was definitely not the case in the old SWC and the other conferences that TCU left.
Then again, if said new conference is reaching more than 1,000 miles west from its geographic center, then going 1,000 miles east to have WVU and Cincy and/or UCF more may make work too. This just seems to perhaps be a means to get more wheat and less chaff.
Then again, if said new conference is reaching more than 1,000 miles west from its geographic center, then going 1,000 miles east to have WVU and Cincy and/or UCF more may make work too. This just seems to perhaps be a means to get more wheat and less chaff.
