Pacific American Conference 18

WhosYourDawggy said:
Look, I think this is a feature not a bug. It's why it was a genius move by the committee that came up with the CFP. Don't say the P5, at the time, and 1 G5. Say top 6. That gives incentive to the G5 schools to invest and know they might have 2 slots, and to the P5 schools that know they better get their conference aligned right or they might miss out.
Click to expand...
What in your opinion is the best course of action for OSU and Wazzou assuming The b12, ACC and the P2 are out for them
 
ralphiewvu said:
What in your opinion is the best course of action for OSU and Wazzou assuming The b12, ACC and the P2 are out for them
Click to expand...
Truthfully, I've been on vacation and haven't been following it that much. Exit fees from other conferences seem to make merging hard unless you take all the schools. If there is no place for them, don't they have to join another conference? I really don't think hanging on to the name means that much. It won't keep them P5 as of 2026 at the latest, and it won't give them a seat at the Rose Bowl after a while. It won't help them get a TV contract.

They both have great Olympic sports, so they have to join a local conference for those sports, I'd think. Stanford could go Indy for football, I suppose.

I think the ACC would be idiots to pick them up. It won't change their contract problems and will add expenses.

Does it make the most sense for the B1G to grab them at a very low price, and have 6 teams on the West Coast? At least for the non-football sports, they could play those teams a lot instead of traveling as much.

They are in a pickle, that is for sure.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Count on that happening. The PAC was the worst conference in the CFP era before they lost all their good teams. They are no longer considered P5 starting in 2024. They will absolutely be treated like a G conference - their contract will reflect that, and their place in the pecking order will reflect that. Again, the G6 should have their own championship. That's how to make money.

There are auto-bids, I can't see how you don't see that. It's in the language. The top 6 conference champs are automatically in. That's an auto-bid even if you are to stubborn to admit it.
Click to expand...
@michaeljordan_fan ... you reacted with a Bullshit. What is it that is bullshit? The PAC has been left out of the last 6 CFPs, so I know you aren't saying that my comment on the past PAC is bullshit, and what do you care? Isn't your team in the B1G now?

They will certainly no longer be P5, that's not bullshit. So, tell me what it is that got your panties in a twist.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
@michaeljordan_fan ... you reacted with a Bullshit. What is it that is bullshit? The PAC has been left out of the last 6 CFPs, so I know you aren't saying that my comment on the past PAC is bullshit, and what do you care? Isn't your team in the B1G now?

They will certainly no longer be P5, that's not bullshit. So, tell me what it is that got your panties in a twist.
Click to expand...


mjf starts slinging bullshit and rainbow ratings the moment he/she knows he/she's lost a debate.

It's akin to a 10 year old flipping a Monopoly board.

1692663635813.png
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
@michaeljordan_fan ... you reacted with a Bullshit. What is it that is bullshit? The PAC has been left out of the last 6 CFPs, so I know you aren't saying that my comment on the past PAC is bullshit, and what do you care? Isn't your team in the B1G now?

They will certainly no longer be P5, that's not bullshit. So, tell me what it is that got your panties in a twist.
Click to expand...
Bigxii is the worst of the cfp era
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Truthfully, I've been on vacation and haven't been following it that much. Exit fees from other conferences seem to make merging hard unless you take all the schools. If there is no place for them, don't they have to join another conference? I really don't think hanging on to the name means that much. It won't keep them P5 as of 2026 at the latest, and it won't give them a seat at the Rose Bowl after a while. It won't help them get a TV contract.

They both have great Olympic sports, so they have to join a local conference for those sports, I'd think. Stanford could go Indy for football, I suppose.

I think the ACC would be idiots to pick them up. It won't change their contract problems and will add expenses.

Does it make the most sense for the B1G to grab them at a very low price, and have 6 teams on the West Coast? At least for the non-football sports, they could play those teams a lot instead of traveling as much.

They are in a pickle, that is for sure.
Click to expand...
There is that PAC emergency fund or whatever that is that could be used to buy some teams out for 2025. Rumors were stated that it’s close if not to $400 million. Not sure I believe it’s that high but if it’s not far off that could be something. I do feel for OSU and Wazzou but such Is life.

I understand what Stanford and Cal are trying to do with the ACC, but that travel is hellish for them and considering they likely don’t add extra to the pie (just keep payouts the same with pro-rata) I doubt it happens.

I see the 4 PAC sticking together with Stanford/Cal grabbing some academic schools to go along with some of the West Coast G5s OSU and Wazzou want.
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
Bigxii is the worst of the cfp era
Click to expand...
That's not what the numbers say ... this is the number of times a team got in, and what the record was when they get there. The B12 wins across the board with number of appearances and the fact that the PAC was last in the CFP in 2016. That's 7 years in a row not being in.

Big 12: 6 (1-5)
PAC 12: 2 (1-2)

I was referring to CFP appearances and performances ... that's what the thread was about. If you were talking about overall conference quality, I won't argue about it because I really don't care.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
That's not what the numbers say ... this is the number of times a team got in, and what the record was when they get there. The B12 wins across the board with number of appearances and the fact that the PAC was last in the CFP in 2016. That's 7 years in a row not being in.

Big 12: 6 (1-5)
PAC 12: 2 (1-2)

I was referring to CFP appearances and performances ... that's what the thread was about. If you were talking about overall conference quality, I won't argue about it because I really don't care.
Click to expand...

1692681781879.png

moving-goalpost.gif
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
That's not what the numbers say ... this is the number of times a team got in, and what the record was when they get there. The B12 wins across the board with number of appearances and the fact that the PAC was last in the CFP in 2016. That's 7 years in a row not being in.

Big 12: 6 (1-5)
PAC 12: 2 (1-2)

I was referring to CFP appearances and performances ... that's what the thread was about. If you were talking about overall conference quality, I won't argue about it because I really don't care.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was referring to overall conference strength in the cfp era...although if you go by performance in CFP games pac has bigxii beat there as well
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
Yes, I was referring to overall conference strength in the cfp era...although if you go by performance in CFP games pac has bigxii beat there as well
Click to expand...
Not sure I follow. B12 had teams in the CFP 6 times, played a total of 6 games, won 1. PAC was in 2 times, played 3 games, won 1.

Both had 2 teams get in. Both go to the NC once. PAC hasn't been in the CFP since 2016 - a 7 year drought, while OU played in it regularly until 2021, and TCU got to the finals last year.

I get that the percentage is better for the PAC but that's just because the denominator is larger for the B12 which means it got in more. You don't get to brag about a better percentage when you both only won 1 game, and the reason your percentage is better is because you got in 1/3 the times the B12 got in.

Sorry, but the B12 has been demonstrably better in the CFP itself, although with the results both conferences had you are kind of bragging about being the tallest building in Topeka ... no one cares.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Not sure I follow. B12 had teams in the CFP 6 times, played a total of 6 games, won 1. PAC was in 2 times, played 3 games, won 1.

Both had 2 teams get in. Both go to the NC once. PAC hasn't been in the CFP since 2016 - a 7 year drought, while OU played in it regularly until 2021, and TCU got to the finals last year.

I get that the percentage is better for the PAC but that's just because the denominator is larger for the B12 which means it got in more. You don't get to brag about a better percentage when you both only won 1 game, and the reason your percentage is better is because you got in 1/3 the times the B12 got in.

Sorry, but the B12 has been demonstrably better in the CFP itself, although with the results both conferences had you are kind of bragging about being the tallest building in Topeka ... no one cares.
Click to expand...

Bigxii has been weaker overall, giving teams an easier path to get in.

The bigxiis lone win was a close game.

The pacs was a blowout that for many years held the record for mov.

The current mov record goes to the Bigxiis last appearance in the cfp.

Sorry that I don't give credit to "appearances" where the bigxii is laughed off the field.
 
Hu War Yu said:
So, to recap: the PAC is a better conference because they've had FEWER teams in the playoffs? Am I to understand that this is correct?
Click to expand...
Apparently, that is the case. If you get to the CFP twice, and another conference 6 times, and you both only won one game, the one that only got there twice (and has been shut out of the CFP for the last 6 years) is, therefore, the better CFP conference. Makes total sense ... LOL, SMH.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
Apparently, that is the case. If you get to the CFP twice, and another conference 6 times, and you both only won one game, the one that only got there twice (and has been shut out of the CFP for the last 6 years) is, therefore, the better CFP conference. Makes total sense ... LOL, SMH.
Click to expand...
Well, you know, of course, in the SEC, when there's no dominant team it's because the conference is so strong from top to bottom that they beat each other up. Surely this applies to the 21st century PAC as well?
 
This poster came on surly yesterday and plugged a crazy scenario

Oliver Luck is trying to save the PAC in a weird way
-adding SDSU to have 5 schools
-joining the ACC for football only
-Apple giving 18-23 million per school (PAC 5)
-ESPN giving 30-35 mil more to current ACC schools (total not per school)
-ACC will give a bulk of that to FSU/Clemson
-SMU joins the ACC but takes no media revenue for 7 years (LOL)

ESPN does this because it opens up another late night window for them and makes FSU/Clemson happy for the time being (keeping the ACC together)
Apple wants CFB

Twitter is saying the ACC is voting again today for the inclusion of Cal/Stanford so this scenario is probably over already?

oh yeah and for the other sports, PAC would add Gonzaga and St Marys to cut down travel costs
 
Thiefery said:
This poster came on surly yesterday and plugged a crazy scenario

Oliver Luck is trying to save the PAC in a weird way
-adding SDSU to have 5 schools
-joining the ACC for football only
-Apple giving 18-23 million per school (PAC 5)
-ESPN giving 30-35 mil more to current ACC schools (total not per school)
-ACC will give a bulk of that to FSU/Clemson
-SMU joins the ACC but takes no media revenue for 7 years (LOL)

ESPN does this because it opens up another late night window for them and makes FSU/Clemson happy for the time being (keeping the ACC together)
Apple wants CFB

Twitter is saying the ACC is voting again today for the inclusion of Cal/Stanford so this scenario is probably over already?

oh yeah and for the other sports, PAC would add Gonzaga and St Marys to cut down travel costs
Click to expand...
1. PAC 5 isn’t worth 18mm a team
2. I don’t see how this adds 30mm of value to ESPN
3. I could see where adding Gonzaga and St Mary’s non-football helps but when is that ever worked.
 
Deep Creek said:
The Power 2 needs to have their own playoff and the wimpy eight have their own. That way the Power 2 doesn’t have to worry about appeasing anyone.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that this is where it is all headed. Nebraska's AD said something, I think it was last week, about the possibility of the top 35-40 brands breaking away from the rest of the pack at some point in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top