• The KillerFrogs

What we are hearing from the Big 12 and Pac 12

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
Well, you can turn Kliavkoff over, because he's done on that side. He is bitter because he has nothing left but bitterness. If the PAC was going to stick together and he was going to continue in his cushy gig, he'd be a happy and hopeful fellow.

The PAC is dead, but it hasn't finished twitching yet.
 

Limey Frog

Full Member
Call me a pessimist, but I wouldn't rule out the reverse happening. Right now there are ten Big XII members. If the Pac could get six of the eight leftovers to sign up for their league, those six plus OU/Texas could just vote to dissolve the Big XII on the spot. I could absolutely see that happening if Oregon and UW become convinced that they are never going to the Big Ten.
 

CountryFrog

Active Member
The best part of Kliavkov's performance this morning was the Q & A, where he was asked how committed the remaining ten members are. He said that they're having twice-weekly zoom calls and he feels confident having "looked them in the eye".

Have you heard that phrase anywhere before?
Curb Your Enthusiasm Judging You GIF
 

Big Frog II

Active Member
Call me a pessimist, but I wouldn't rule out the reverse happening. Right now there are ten Big XII members. If the Pac could get six of the eight leftovers to sign up for their league, those six plus OU/Texas could just vote to dissolve the Big XII on the spot. I could absolutely see that happening if Oregon and UW become convinced that they are never going to the Big Ten.
Yes, you are a pessimist. They could have picked the Big 12 apart last year, but they chose poorly and did nothing. They are the ones on shaky ground.
 

JogginFrog

Active Member
The more time that passes without the Big 12 gaining new members, the more nervous I get. I have this vision of ABC/ESPN and Fox having this conversation:

"I thought we'd be fine once we locked up some marquee matchups in the Pacific time zone. Filled all the schedule holes. It dooms the schools outside the top 30, but who needs them?"
"Our blueblood partners sure don't want them."
"Of course not. But I've been thinking more about those spare schools. They're going to shop for a media partner. It's like we've just invited Amazon to get into the college football business--and for NBC to see beyond South Bend."
"I hate those guys."
"So, why leave anybody for them to do business with?"
"Because the universities don't want to split the pie more ways."
"Right. But we just want to make sure no more pies are created. So, how are we going to do that?"
"Take them all. Instead of two 20-team leagues, why not have a pair of 30-team leagues?"
"Sure. But the BIG and SEC gonna hate that. How to convince them?"
"Maybe we float the idea of an expanded playoff. And make it so that the other leagues have an easier path."
"I hear you. Expanded playoffs are better for us, anyway."
"Eventually they'll cave and agree to take most of the PAC. We can mop up the ACC when their GOR expires."
"Perfect. We'll see if Amazon really wants to throw in on a Great Plains league."
 

JogginFrog

Active Member
Event the SDSU thing sounds like a network manipulation.

"The other thing I've been thinking? How come no Power 5 program in the 17th-largest metro?"
"We could definitely use more trips to San Diego."
"Let's get the PAC to think about SDSU as a replacement program. It doesn't have the academic rep, but those guys are desperate. Then, when we orchestrate the big merge, we bring them along."
"The BIG will never take SDSU."
"No, but the SEC will. Now that the BIG gets regular trips to SoCal, you know the SEC wants some of that."
"And I can think of a travel partner in the fastest-growing market and top tourist destination in the country."
"UNLV will definitely be next. But let's hold that idea until we see if San Diego flies."
 

asleep003

Active Member
Why would we care if the PAC takes SDSU? They should take all the MWC teams they want and we should celebrate each one of them.

This is a fight for survival and the SD state and the Southern California market for recruiting and TV market is their top expansion candidate.

I believe SD state is an attractive expansion candidate for the big 12 for multiple reasons. Good athletics (both football and basketball), large TV market, recruiting and good travel partners for 4 corner schools
Nope
 

Eight

Member
Passing on SD state is similar to when Big 12 passed on Louisville.

SD State is a strong athletic program, building a new football stadium and located in a Major TV market with only one pro team.

There is huge upside to adding SD state especially for BYU and other 4 corner schools

if adding sd state helps byu scheiss that idea
 

Eight

Member
You have this obsession with BYU and its quite sad.

change obession with dislike for the lying, conference killing cultists and you are correct

the sad part is you are on a tcu board telling us we shouldn't say mean things about the school that left us all for the greener pastures of being an independent

simple solution, go the scheiss away until we play in a few years
 
Last edited:

JogginFrog

Active Member
The knock on SDSU has always been that they didn't own their own stadium and it wasn't on campus. Their new 35,000-seat stadium anchors the new Mission Valley campus and is owned by the university--reflecting a long-term commitment to football.

If you're shopping for a media partner, it's a good add if the net gain to the next media rights contract exceeds the per-school average. I don't see how SDSU doesn't deliver on that. 400,000+ alumni and the 17th largest market in a recruiting hotbed. The destination becomes its own recruiting pitch for every other school (which is what USC and UCLA delivered to the BIG--now you don't have to wait for a Rose Bowl trip).

The biggest downside is the travel cost for minor sports teams. As a minor sports fan, I will hate to see TCU drop sports due to travel expense; but if that's what it takes to survive in a big-media conference world, I think TCU has to be willing to count that cost.

I think the Big 12 should take SDSU before the PAC does. Best way to step on the PAC's throat. Will be impressed if Brett Yormark makes that move.
 

Eight

Member
The knock on SDSU has always been that they didn't own their own stadium and it wasn't on campus. Their new 35,000-seat stadium anchors the new Mission Valley campus and is owned by the university--reflecting a long-term commitment to football.

If you're shopping for a media partner, it's a good add if the net gain to the next media rights contract exceeds the per-school average. I don't see how SDSU doesn't deliver on that. 400,000+ alumni and the 17th largest market in a recruiting hotbed. The destination becomes its own recruiting pitch for every other school (which is what USC and UCLA delivered to the BIG--now you don't have to wait for a Rose Bowl trip).

The biggest downside is the travel cost for minor sports teams. As a minor sports fan, I will hate to see TCU drop sports due to travel expense; but if that's what it takes to survive in a big-media conference world, I think TCU has to be willing to count that cost.

I think the Big 12 should take SDSU before the PAC does. Best way to step on the PAC's throat. Will be impressed if Brett Yormark makes that move.

two issues with adding sdsu

first, you need to add another team as well to keep the balance and with adding two you get to 14 which unbalances things. guess it could be utah and the two az schools if colorado seems themselves as an academic institution
 

JogginFrog

Active Member
two issues with adding sdsu

first, you need to add another team as well to keep the balance and with adding two you get to 14 which unbalances things. guess it could be utah and the two az schools if colorado seems themselves as an academic institution
I can't think of a better way to get the PAC schools off the fence. Next school to sign up is the travel partner. Join now or we'll offer UNLV too. Want to stay in the PAC? Enjoy Fresno and Boise.
 
Top