Jump to content

Someone

Members
  • Posts

    882
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Team
    Texas
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,444 profile views
  1. the laughable thing about this is when that idiot OS Beaver was talking about the AAC possibly getting tams from the PAC the AAC fans were in a giant circle facing each other and pleasuring themselves (wildly).......I need to go check what their buffoon board thinks of this new idea
  2. I think your feelings have a lot of validity the first step needs to be deciding on if there is a deal there with Oregon State and WSU everything after that dealing with new members is not even secondary or tertiary it is past that the only reason more would be added from the AAC or anywhere else is if there was a break even or better deal to make it happen and "break even" should probably include some money for additional travel or solid ways that travel will stay the same or be reduced with the AAC locked into a 10+ year that ESPN made them extend for two of those years to give half shares to 6 new members the MWC is in a position to make something happen on that front with only two years left on their deal......ESPN, Fox, CBS, and Amazon were said to have interest in the PAC 12 (credible reports stated from the ASU president).....so there is some chance that even ESPN might have some money, but it seems unlikely with the cost from the Big 12 moves and the ACC moves (the ACC probably not expected)......Fox has paid up for the Big 12 moves as well and they paid some for the Big 10 to add Oregon and UW.....CBS was only interested in some basketball from the PAC 12 but the fact that Fox and CBS have the MWC now at least gives a foot in the door.....there should be concern that Fox made their moves with the idea of "two years left on the MWC then bye", but I doubt it hell at this point ESPN might not minf seeing a program or two leave the ACC or maybe 3 to get the cost of that disaster down unfortunately the higher cost programs are further east and only Navy makes any sense, but Navy makes a lot of sense for the MWC as well adding teams comes down to dollars and none of that gets settled until the MWC and Oregon State WSU talks get settled
  3. 1. their team in the New Mexico bowl was not stellar ya'll kicked the crap out of them 52-13 2. Carnegie R1 is meaningless it is not a ranking and the Carnegie Foundation and those that do the CLASSIFICATIONS now have gone to great lengths to discourage the use of their classifications as a ranking or as a means of comparison of quality.....it says it right in the FAQs on their website and the past FAQs spelled it out in even more detail.....they mean nothing about educational quality and they do not even look into the quality of research or the usefulness of that research or the PhDs produced that are part of the metrics used 3. they do a very low amount of research especially for the number of PhDs they produce and they have only recently had a bump because of university self funded research in 2022 they did $81,252,000 in total research AND development which puts then at #174 while UTSA did $145,362,000.....UTEP $109,410,000 and Texas State $72,510,000 but of course Texas State only has about 12 doctoral programs total and some of those are new and their engineering programs are relatively new as well so they have been growing their research and development at a much faster rate while offering about 26 fewer doctoral degree programs Colorado School of Mines, SDSU (with what 1 doctoral program), and Montana do more research and development than that in a couple of years Texas State will pass them in research and development especially as their engineering programs grow 4. it was not north Texas state that helped TCU start a MD program it was TCOM the Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine that is a part of the north Texas state system, but is a separate institution and that is prevented by law from offering a MD.....TCU has already broken off from there and is in full control of the MD program now and TCOM still only offers the DO degree
  4. there are no "auto bids" for any specific conferences.....there are auto bids for X number of the highest ranked conference champs and then the other at large that come from the rest of the top 12 we are not talking about a bid to the games we are talking about a % of the profits from the playoffs existing right now P5 conferences get 80% of the football playoff money and that equals about $90 million per P5 conference and the PAC 12 gets that even though they have not placed a team in the playoffs since 2016.....the G5s split a little over $100 million between the 5 of them or about $20 million each and part of the reason that the PAC 12 and Big 10 get that P5 share of money is based on their ownership of The Rose Bowl Game just like the Big 12 and their Cotton Bowl affiliation and the SEC and their Sugar Bowl affiliation got them larger shares because way back in the day for the BCS to exist those conferences had agree to no longer have their champions licked into those lucrative bowl games and instead agree for the two highest ranked ones to meet in a rotation of those bowls for even more money......conferences that did not have very high paying and very long term bowl affiliations were just brought along for the ride
  5. there is not going to be a change to the distribution of P5 money until the end of the current contract by the time that contract ends people are going to see what a disaster some of these conferences are and the mistakes that were made and programs are going to be looking to the future and that may well be a future where things shift again.....and they are not going to yank something away from the PAC that sets a precedent for yanking something away pretty much immediately from a place they might find themselves in the future there will be pressure in Oregon and Washington to not allow that and the Big 10 will have to listen....and there will be pressure on UCLA and Cal if there are California schools in the PAC Utah, ASU, AU and CU are not looking to screw over anyone left in the PAC they are not happy with how thing are if there is pressure from those 3 states there will be federal pressure and the Big 10 is not going to be subjected to that (the SEC does not care)
  6. you have to ditch north Texas state 1. they suck badly and always will 2. there is no "market" there the DFW market is massively fragmented and only getting worse and they do not even deliver their own alumni much less casual fans 3. UTEP sucks, but they at least deliver their market when they have a pulse and they match better with UMN and they had their best success in the WAC and have been horrible with the mistake of "all those Texas teams" 4. Texas State would deliver more than north Texas state in terms of a market and they have a better upside they are a much more oriented to on campus and in town students and their upside athletically and academically is much higher
  7. the interesting thing with Navy is considering the interest they would draw in San Diego and Hawaii......in addition Army, Air Force, and Navy would draw attention in San Antonio and having all 3 in the same conference would be a strength Navy has made clear they had to be in the western half of the AAC because they wanted the Texas recruiting so they would probably want two Texas programs and I bet they would welcome some the "now wide open" aspect of California recruiting with all the changes there so they could have interest in a MWC that is formed the right way
  8. while no one does travel partners anymore you are going to have a hard time convincing a program in Texas to go west on their own UTSA had an offer from the MWC when they moved up and they were stupid enough to ignore the history of TCU being alone in the west and offering something "different" than most of the other Texas G5 programs and instead accepted a horrible CUSA to "be with other Texas teams"......in the form of a not great Rice, a horrible north Texas state, and a really horrible UTEP I am sure some would argue that being in the AAC is better for UTSA now, but they were stuck in the CUSA making horrible money with terrible exposure for a long time vs what they would have had in the MWC and in addition taking a half share in the AAC for the next 10+ years is a terrible deal vs what the MWC is paying now much less if the MWC gets a good TV deal in 2 years or even more so if there is a merger into the PAC and a better TV deal comes immediately after I think UTSA would be less happy to move with Texas State and the UT System might play a very small part in suggesting UTEP (the UT System really does not get involved in these types of things), but I think Texas State would be a better option though UTEP and their history and their best years in forever being in the WAC says they would be an OK choice really it comes down to the money and worrying about AAC teams is way down the list vs discussions with Oregon State and WSU and figuring out what can become of that
  9. it is about $2.4 million per year.....that is meaningful money, but there is the same issue as the ACC if you set a standard that conferences can have their P5 money pulled then you open your conference up to that in the future I think there is also a chance that the money left over from a G5 conference going away could be placed in a "per participant" pool of money for each team that makes playoff games that could equal to about $2 million per team per game in extra money over what is paid out now and leaving out extra money for the CCG like they do now
  10. by "merging" do you mean the MWC merging into the PAC.....if that happens then Oregon State and WSU can share a little of that money that is left by the others or they can keep it, but the CFB payout, the 2 NCAA votes, and the remaining bowl contracts they can share and that is going to add up to a lot of money for a while if by merging you mean Oregon State and WSU join the MWC well if they do that all of that money goes away and goes with each individual school of the PAC 12 Oregon State and WSU have some time, but they do not have forever and they need to get something going media deal wise.....the easiest for that is to work with Fox and CBS (that had some interest in PAC 12 content) and go ahead and dissolve the PAC 12 and absorb it and get a new media deal and move on with life there are also potential "tampering" and "enticement / torturous interference issues" if Oregon State, WSU and the MWC media partners are looking at dissolving the conference and leaving some current MWC members out of a new formed PAC messing with all of that and trying to work all of that is too complicated and too messy just to leave out one to three teams.....not worth it do a reverse merger into the PAC and move on
  11. the PAC has the two NCAA "autonomy" votes and that is by named conference and there is no mechanism to just remove that the PAC will have assets almost certainly the NCAA credits of $65 million and most likely the $43 million in other assets some of which are ash reserves I do not think they will be able to retain the final year's distribution even though those distributions will not be available until May of 2025 six months after all the 10 teams have exited they will still have a couple of years of bowl contracts though that could change I would expect that some will not because it will be too disruptive to do so for just a year or two I personally feel that Oregon, and Washington will be under tremendous political pressure to support the PAC retaining "P5" status in terms of college football money distributions and I feel the Big 10 will understand that and honor that....I also feel Cal and UCLA will be under the same pressure if the PAC was to add California teams from the MWC I feel that Utah, Arizona, ASU, and CU are not at all interested in taking the P5 football money away from the PAC and I think the Big 12 on the whole will feel the same I know the SEC will not care and will want the money and that leaves the ACC.....I think some will want it, but others will be mindful of the same potential situation happening to them in the future if the ACC loses teams......I think Cal, Stanford, and ND will help the ACC end up and support the PAC remaining eligible for P5 playoff payouts that is currently $90 million per year and expected to go to $152 vs $20 million for a G5 conference with the chance to go to $38 million if you look at the math of $500 million with 80% to the P5 and 20% to G5 moving to potentially $950 million with that same 80/20 split.....the P5 is moving from $90 to $152 and the G5 is moving from $20 to $38 which they will not be happy about if you retain the P5 remove the MWC (merged to the PAC) and go to the G4 then you have $90 million moving to $152 million and then $20 million moving to $47.5 which the G5 will still complain about, but that is a lot more and the P5 can tell them "take that or get nothing and like it" so keeping the P5 and reducing to the G4 clears up some headaches for the P5 without costing them money while also making it a lot less likely that "congress" will want to "get involved"......and that is smart money IMO the reality is the MWC does have the $34 million buyout, but when you start adding up the money and Oregon State and WSU start running the numbers for members of the MWC I do not think it will take long for enough of them to like those numbers that the conference could be disbanded.....at which point anyone dumb enough to want to stay will wake up and take a merger....and on the flip side I do not see Oregon State and WSU wanting to play hardball and leaving a couple of programs out
  12. here is what Wilner says the PAC owns https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/26/mailbag-all-about-washington-state-and-oregon-state-from-the-pac-2-and-a-reverse-merger-with-the-mw-to-the-bylaws-and-war-chest/ $65 million in NCAA credits and $43 million in other assets some that is cash at 7:53 of this video the ASU president states that the Big 10 and PAC 12 own the Rose Bowl game https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2015/12/17/how-much-money-the-rose-bowl-rose-parade-makes-and-how-its-spent/ the above is from 2015, but it states that The Tournament of Roses gives about $19 million each to the PAC 12 and Big 10 after expenses....other than letting expenses getting out of hand I would see no reason they still do not provide money to the two conferences The Rose Bowl game is not some stand alone entity that can act without the approval of the PAC and Big 10 from everything I have read they are tied together
  13. north Texas state sucks do not add them they are garbage with idiot fans the first thing is to work the deal to what needs to be a reverse merger of the MWC into the PAC I see little chance that the MWC will be able to vote to dissolve the conference, but who knows the MWV has two years left on the media deal with Fox and CBS and it is known that Fox, ESPN, Amazon, and CBS for a little bit of basketball had negotiated with the PAC 12, but Amazon apparently did not come to the final negotiations......so CBS and Fox should have some money to spend ESPN is probably tapped out at this point Apple seems to want to the the only player if they make a deal and the MWC does not need a 100% streaming deal that is death I would work with Fox and CBS to make a deal happen, reverse merge into the PAC, it up Oregon State and WSU for half the remaining NCAA credits in the PAC (that is about $65 million according to Wilner do half is $32.5 or about $3 million per MWC member total over the next decade) and the WSU and Oregon State can keep the other half and the rest of the PAC assets except The Rose Bowl Game and money from The Tournament of Roses is "conference owned" like it is now after that if the TV deal is good enough worry about expansion, but the deal will probably need to be $12 to $14 million in TV only money to lure AAC teams and also concentrate on the PAC keeping a P5 distribution of football playoff money because that is BIG and about to get BIGGER and having that will definitely help pull AAC members
  14. yea but another problem will be when those donors are all going in their own direction and are not coordinated with each other or with the program and they are just paying players they want to pay and not those that fit in with the program or the team overall
×
×
  • Create New...