• The KillerFrogs

Pac-2 now the Pac-8

Sangria Wine

Sangria Wine

Active Member
82 Frog Fever said:
Wow, that seems very strange to me. There are so many better targets.
The PAC expansion momentum appears to be slowing because the AAC is going on the offensive with their own expansion pitch.
We may see a nasty PAC vs. AAC expansion war for the Undisputed Best Group Conf.
Click to expand...
If either of them had a brain they would merge into the second class version of the B1G and cement themselves as the top of the second tier.
 
ShreveFrog

ShreveFrog

Full Member
@Sangria Wine - Not sure what AAC has to offer now other than maybe UTSA and Tulane? Including USF would make a PAC merger another very far flung conference. As always, I could be wrong.
I think if Pac coaxes Stan and Cal back, along with the five MWC adds, they're good as the best non-power conference. They'd have a decent 9-team, 8-game round robin for football.
 
Horned Toad

Horned Toad

Active Member
ShreveFrog said:
@Sangria Wine - Not sure what AAC has to offer now other than maybe UTSA and Tulane? Including USF would make a PAC merger another very far flung conference. As always, I could be wrong.
I think if Pac coaxes Stan and Cal back, along with the five MWC adds, they're good as the best non-power conference. They'd have a decent 9-team, 8-game round robin for football.
Click to expand...
I don‘t see how the PAC could coax Cal and Stanford back, at least they are in a Power 4 conference at the moment.
 
ShreveFrog

ShreveFrog

Full Member
Reading now that Tulane and UTSA have pledged to stay in the AAC. So Gonzaga and UNLV are now possible Pac adds.
 
Last edited:
peacock

peacock

Active Member
If I'm the Pac I would go get Texas State, much better addition then UTSA or University of North Texas in my opinion, with 40k students they could be a sleeping giant if they make the investment plus it gives you both the San Antonio and Austin markets. Perfect time to buy low before their coach heads to Fort Worth.

Correction, I guess I should say "stoned" giant instead of sleeping because after all it is San Marcos!
 
82 Frog Fever

82 Frog Fever

Active Member
Big Frog II said:
Why didn't they just merge with the MWC?
Click to expand...
The PAC is simply cherry picking. I assume teams left over will go to the Sunbelt or whatever.
It’s sorta like the food chain. Something is killed and everyone from the lion on down gets a piece of the carcass.
However, the 3 AAC teams saying NO to the PAC, means the PAC will have to go much deeper into the MWC than they had planned. Utah State is a result. Getting to 10 teams will be interesting.
Who knows, maybe they rethink and seek a merger after all.
Also, I know there is a lot of noise around StanCal returning to save the day for the PAC, but they signed the ACC GOR, which has been a tough nut to crack to this point and many years to go.
The Group football world is kind of eating itself because WASU/OSU are grasping at relevance.
 
Last edited:
Horned Frog Country

Horned Frog Country

Full Member
82 Frog Fever said:
The PAC is simply cherry picking. I assume teams left over will go to the Sunbelt or whatever.
It’s sorta like the food chain. Something is killed and everyone from the lion on down gets a piece of the carcass.
However, the 3 AAC teams saying NO to the PAC, means the PAC will have to go much deeper into the MWC than they had planned. Utah State is a result. Getting to 10 teams will be interesting.
Who knows, maybe they rethink and seek a merger after all.
Also, I know there is a lot of noise around StanCal returning to save the day for the PAC, but they signed the ACC GOR, which has been a tough nut to crack to this point and many years to go.
The Group football world is kind of eating itself because WASU/OSU are grasping at relevance.
Click to expand...
I would not be surprised if the ACC was willing to wave the GOR for Cal and Stanford. I bet they are a financial burden on the ACC especially for the non revenue sports.
 
82 Frog Fever

82 Frog Fever

Active Member
Horned Frog Country said:
I would not be surprised if the ACC was willing to wave the GOR for Cal and Stanford. I bet they are a financial burden on the ACC especially for the non revenue sports.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe they’re a financial burden. Cal and Stanford will only get a 30% share in the first seven years, followed by 70% in year eight and 75% in year nine before getting a full payout amount in year 10.
It works out to be about $25m per year over the term, but for the first 7 years Stan/Cal is only $10-15m
 
82 Frog Fever

82 Frog Fever

Active Member
ShreveFrog said:
Reading now that Tulane and UTSA have pledged to stay in the AAC. So Gonzaga and UNLV are now possible Pac adds.
Click to expand...
Something is going on. I’m hearing UNLV rejected an offer made by PAC (IDK the reason), and that was a big reason why the PAC went down their list to Utah St.
….and now UNLV is back asking the PAC for a 2nd offer.
 
NovaScotiaFrog

NovaScotiaFrog

Active Member
Does any of this really matter? This sounds to me like if the Big East and CUSA were fighting each other in 2012. What's the point?

The reality is that the power conference Pac 12, the one that had USC, Oregon, Washington, UCLA, Stanford, etc, is dead. What you are left with is a conference filled with Mountain West / WAC teams. It doesn't really matter that you have the old name, you're still not the same conference you were. It's not that different than the 2014 "Big East" (er...I guess by then they had even sold the name) of UCF, SMU, Houston, Tulsa, UCONN, and Memphis, and pretending that it's the same conference prestige (and deserving of the same auto-bid) as the one that had Miami, Virginia Tech, WVU, Pitt, and Syracuse.
 
82 Frog Fever

82 Frog Fever

Active Member
NovaScotiaFrog said:
Does any of this really matter? This sounds to me like if the Big East and CUSA were fighting each other in 2012. What's the point?

The reality is that the power conference Pac 12, the one that had USC, Oregon, Washington, UCLA, Stanford, etc, is dead. What you are left with is a conference filled with Mountain West / WAC teams. It doesn't really matter that you have the old name, you're still not the same conference you were. It's not that different than the 2014 "Big East" (er...I guess by then they had even sold the name) of UCF, SMU, Houston, Tulsa, UCONN, and Memphis, and pretending that it's the same conference prestige (and deserving of the same auto-bid) as the one that had Miami, Virginia Tech, WVU, Pitt, and Syracuse.
Click to expand...
It depends.
From the pov of B12 teams, no it doesn’t really matter.
The B12 is clearly a solid second string conference that will continue losing ground to the 1st string SEC/BIG cartel when they receive 3 to 4 invites each to the CFP every year. While buying the best players available with the $$$ & CFP marketing.
For ALL of the Group teams, it matters greatly.
They are clearly 3rd string, as they have one path for one CFP spot, the conference champion of the best conference. If one conference can get a leg up as being viewed as “Best in Group”; then they’ve increased their odds of getting that one CFP spot. It’s their one shot to be relevant, and maybe even get an invite to be on the 2nd string.
I’m not sure, but I believe 10 teams are needed to hold a conf. championship game. I assume the PAC will try to move toward 10 at a minimum. ….but so far, they’ve botched this badly. Again.
 

Forum Sponsor

Community Title

KillerFrogs is proud to be sponsored by the Community National Title.

Latest posts

Top