Thee PAC 12, Big 10, and ACC (Alliance) are Dividing Up tOrphaned 8 As We Plorst.

[Wild Turkey]

True, but that didn't stop them when they asked Rutgers and Maryland to join the club.

I actually had a lot more but this site is acting goofy and posting my shit and deleting stuff so I’ll come back later and expand my comments.

I’ve lost what I typed 3 times

 

[outofyourmind]

They have invested in their facilities of late and do have a passionate fanbase. I thing that will be considered by the Big 10

Maybe
But lets be honest here.

The only track record Iowa State has is that they 'can' get good for a couple of years every generation or so, then drop off the face of the earth again. Rinse and Repeat.

I wouldn't bank on that changing.

 

[Red_Alert]

In the SEC, it is bigger. That is why NFL franchises like the Saints, Falcons, Bucs, Jaguars, etc. leave in the shadow of their SEC counter-parts in state. That is why the ACC, B1G, and Pac12 is having to make an ALLIANCE against the SEC right now. You can argue that the SEC isn't any better, especially in mid and bottom tier, than the other leagues but you have a hard time arguing fanbase. Only the B1G competes and even they have states that see NFL teams far stronger than College.

Look at a team like Arkansas. They are the only game in town for that state and they have a very large fan base despite their record.

Iowa State lives in the shadow of Iowa, that is their problem. I have been to Iowa several times and 2/3 of the CFB fans that I have met are Hawkeyes.

This is the REASON the Big12 doesn't have any suitors. If Iowa State have an SEC level fanbase, they would be a lock for a P5 league.

The SEC is NFL level folks.

We're debating someone that thinks Tennessee and Arkansas have been Clemsoning for the past 10 years. LMFAO!!!!

 

[Red_Alert]

Maybe
But lets be honest here.

The only track record Iowa State has is that they 'can' get good for a couple of years every generation or so, then drop off the face of the earth again. Rinse and Repeat.

I wouldn't bank on that changing.

I wouldn't either, but Iowa St also brings basketball.

Do you think Campbell would leave Iowa St if they were to get Big 10 monies and a commitment from ISU admin to pay him well + invest further into facilities?

I'd have to think it would have to be USC, Bama, Texas, OU, Ohio St level for him to make the jump.

 

[Red_Alert]

I wouldn't either, but Iowa St also brings basketball.

Do you think Campbell would leave Iowa St if they were to get Big 10 monies and a commitment from ISU admin to pay him well + invest further into facilities?

I'd have to think it would have to be USC, Bama, Texas, OU, Ohio St level for him to make the jump.

Oh, I forgot.

"He'd also go to Kentucky or Vandy because SEC"

My apologies.

 

[Red_Alert]

volbound

 

[Wild Turkey]

I’ll try again but go conference by conference.

ACC - would like to see it but don’t think it happens because they have to leave room for ND to join and a 15 member conference with one floater (ND) would be a scheduling nightmare.

If they added two teams they would be looking at 18 teams potentially down the road.

 

[Wild Turkey]

PAC - They need to shake the league up, get different time zone games and increase revenue for all the teams. If they can do all three with expansion it makes sense but if they can‘t particularly if it dilutes revenue then it doesn’t make sense.

I not sure not having Kansas basketball and Iowa State football as choices would make them happy. Feels like they are getting leftovers.

 

[Wild Turkey]

B1G - I’m not sure the economics of adding AAU teams but this does little for their marketability from a sports perspective. You just get more ho hum football games that aren’t going to increase ratings.

I like the alliance angle better.

 

[Red_Alert]

B1G - I’m not sure the economics of adding AAU teams but this does little for their marketability from a sports perspective. You just get more ho hum football games that aren’t going to increase ratings.

I like the alliance angle better.

What is the "alliance angle"?

It has not been announced and (at this point) is a lot of 'click bait' perspective from the 'experts'.

You know, the same 'experts' that were in the dark when TX/OU to the SEC news broke? That move had been in the planning stages for 7 months, but none of the 'experts' knew?

All we know is that the 'alliance' is to counter what the SEC just did in adding TX/OU. There are NO TX/OU's on the table anywhere that are not already PAC, Big 10, or ACC.

IMO it's an agreement not to poach each other and for each to get to 16 in football.

The best way to do that is to go after the orphans that have been considered P5 'grind' for BCS and Play-Off consideration for decades.

 

[Red_Alert]

You can be sure the 'experts' were NOT in the meetings being held by the PAC, Big 10, or ACC commissioners and AD's.

 

[Wild Turkey]

What is the "alliance angle"?

It has not been announced and (at this point) is a lot of 'click bait' perspective from the 'experts'.

You know, the same 'experts' that were in the dark when TX/OU to the SEC news broke? That move had been in the planning stages for 7 months, but none of the 'experts' knew?

All we know is that the 'alliance' is to counter what the SEC just did in adding TX/OU. There are NO TX/OU's on the table anywhere that are not already PAC, Big 10, or ACC.

IMO it's an agreement not to poach each other and for each to get to 16 in football.

The best way to do that is to go after the orphans that have been considered P5 'grind' for BCS and Play-Off consideration for decades.

I like the prospect of a potential scheduling alliance.

It’s annoying when people KNOW what you are saying but being obstinate and churlish.

 

[Red_Alert]

I like the prospect of a potential scheduling alliance.

It’s annoying when people KNOW what you are saying but being obstinate and churlish.

Is that even necessary?

Is it necessary for the PAC, Big 10, or ACC to get their Top Dogs into an expanded Play-Off?

It wasn't necessary for the PAC, Big 10, ACC, or Big 12 to get their Top Dogs into a 4 team play-off.

It wasn't necessary for the Big 10 to land a $54 million per team media contract 4 years ago with their only Top Dog being tOSU.

 

[Wizardhawk]

The PAC has been in perpetual internal debate about expansion since it formed. It took a decade of work last time to go from 10 to 12. Those schools found out early after joining that access to their recruiting grounds were high reasons to allow them in. They had to have the academic clout and something for the rest of the schools to poach to even be in consideration.

Sure, the recruiting fields of Texas are huge, but no one believes even top PAC teams can gain substantial draw against the SEC's efforts in that state by taking second/third tier offerings.

TCU/Baylor? There would have to be radical changes from what (mostly the cali schools) have fought against for half a century. Every time BYU has been discussed as a natural pickup for the PAC it is pointed out how vehemently the conference is opposed to religious schools. So tell me how much control the voting block of the 4 cali schools still hold over the PAC and I'll tell you the likelihood they can ever take a religious institution.

Colorado/Utah did create further travel for the rest of the conf, but anything in the ashes of the B12 would blow that up even further.

The PAC can't keep from tripping over their own dicks on just about everything. Our fans can blame the last commissioner, but it is the member institutions and their stupid politics that always get in the way of directly competing with the rest of the P5.

I have no faith they can pull their collective heads out of their asses and do anything productive for the conference through this.

 

[Red_Alert]

The PAC has been in perpetual internal debate about expansion since it formed. It took a decade of work last time to go from 10 to 12. Those schools found out early after joining that access to their recruiting grounds were high reasons to allow them in. They had to have the academic clout and something for the rest of the schools to poach to even be in consideration.

Sure, the recruiting fields of Texas are huge, but no one believes even top PAC teams can gain substantial draw against the SEC's efforts in that state by taking second/third tier offerings.

TCU/Baylor? There would have to be radical changes from what (mostly the cali schools) have fought against for half a century. Every time BYU has been discussed as a natural pickup for the PAC it is pointed out how vehemently the conference is opposed to religious schools. So tell me how much control the voting block of the 4 cali schools still hold over the PAC and I'll tell you the likelihood they can ever take a religious institution.

Colorado/Utah did create further travel for the rest of the conf, but anything in the ashes of the B12 would blow that up even further.

The PAC can't keep from tripping over their own dicks on just about everything. Our fans can blame the last commissioner, but it is the member institutions and their stupid politics that always get in the way of directly competing with the rest of the P5.

I have no faith they can pull their collective heads out of their asses and do anything productive for the conference through this.

Yeah, say we ditch the bible thumpers...

Texas Tech
Okie Jr
Kansas State
Boise St

Good to see some PAC 12 perspective BTW.

 

[Deep Creek]

The PAC has been in perpetual internal debate about expansion since it formed. It took a decade of work last time to go from 10 to 12. Those schools found out early after joining that access to their recruiting grounds were high reasons to allow them in. They had to have the academic clout and something for the rest of the schools to poach to even be in consideration.

Sure, the recruiting fields of Texas are huge, but no one believes even top PAC teams can gain substantial draw against the SEC's efforts in that state by taking second/third tier offerings.

TCU/Baylor? There would have to be radical changes from what (mostly the cali schools) have fought against for half a century. Every time BYU has been discussed as a natural pickup for the PAC it is pointed out how vehemently the conference is opposed to religious schools. So tell me how much control the voting block of the 4 cali schools still hold over the PAC and I'll tell you the likelihood they can ever take a religious institution.

Colorado/Utah did create further travel for the rest of the conf, but anything in the ashes of the B12 would blow that up even further.

The PAC can't keep from tripping over their own dicks on just about everything. Our fans can blame the last commissioner, but it is the member institutions and their stupid politics that always get in the way of directly competing with the rest of the P5.

I have no faith they can pull their collective heads out of their asses and do anything productive for the conference through this.

The Wiz lives! I figured you'd been checking all this out but remaining silent. Your perspective has always been good so I've been saving a question for you.

The "It just means more" SEC mantra is definitely true. But is it good? I've lived with the same type thing regarding HS football in Texas. It has gotten waaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy out of hand at times. Not so much now but it shows up every now and then.

Do you ever see conferences where "It doesn't mean more" deciding to say "Screw it." We ain't giving in to this mentality so we're going to go to a Ivy League type set up albeit to a lesser degree?

 

[TechRaiderRider]

Yeah, say we ditch the bible thumpers...

Texas Tech
Okie Jr
Kansas State
Boise St

Good to see some PAC 12 perspective BTW.

i'd prefer this scenario -
don't see the pac adding tcu and/or baylor -
plus, it could put some distance bet/
tech and the toads/bears -

 

[Red_Alert]

Think about it....

The mainstream media couldn't see the 'shit-storm' that was TX/OU to the SEC in 7 months?

During the Off-Season when there's no games to talk about, no less?

Yet we give them credibility in knowing what the PAC/B1G/ACC Alliance consists of?

The mainstream media is similar to the the weatherman. They have the podium. When wrong about what to expect they can sweep it under the rug with their NEW FORECAST.

You never hear them say "Yeah I didn't have a fucking clue when I made my predictions earlier in the week". Yet we should believe them now."

 

[Wizardhawk]

The Wiz lives! I figured you'd been checking all this out but remaining silent. Your perspective has always been good so I've been saving a question for you.

The "It just means more" SEC mantra is definitely true. But is it good? I've lived with the same type thing regarding HS football in Texas. It has gotten waaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy out of hand at times. Not so much now but it shows up every now and then.

Do you ever see conferences where "It doesn't mean more" deciding to say "Screw it." We ain't giving in to this mentality so we're going to go to a Ivy League type set up albeit to a lesser degree?

Football specifically does mean more in the SEC, at least more than it does in the PAC for sure. Football and the revenue coming from it are top priorities there. A muddled mix of the appearance of academic superiority, politics, and 'tradition' are usually higher on the list here. Major reason why the PAC has not been keeping up with the other powers.

The SEC slogan through is a recruiting tool and those are seldom more than propaganda.

The B12 breakup isn't the only thing threatening to blow up the current landscape. The NIL and college athletes now being able to make money on things like tictok, youtube, etc and the looming playoff expansion add fuel to what will be massive shifts in college athletics.

PAC has a few schools with wealthy boosters capable of keeping up with other conf ability to pay their athletes, but they have to move to that football first mentality to really compete. Some schools individually are, like Oregon could give shit less about Cal or UCLA whining about their practices, but they need it at a conf level to reverse course and keep up with this rapid change that is coming.

I've heard grumblings from even UW and Oregon about how they could exit the conf as things shift and move through this. There are other movements being discussed. The question is, how high up the ladder are they REALLY being discussed vs lower level people who are putting them out on the web as possibilities.

Let's see what actually happens with the B12 and where those chips land. We've seen the saber rattling of Texas before and it didn't end up how it was threatened to go.

 

[ralphiewvu]

I’ll try again but go conference by conference.

ACC - would like to see it but don’t think it happens because they have to leave room for ND to join and a 15 member conference with one floater (ND) would be a scheduling nightmare.

If they added two teams they would be looking at 18 teams potentially down the road.

If they added one team they could go to pods of 5 and play a 9 game conference schedule (play your pod and another pod) Rotating between the two pods every year. Not a huge scheduling problem, keep as many rivalries within a pod to guarantee the games get played.