Five years from now, will we have a Pac-12 and a Mountain West?

[Did I hear a WOOSH?]

On 6/25/2024 at 11:24 AM, SteedLaw said:

I might be in the minority, but I fully predict that the likes of Utah, ASU, and Arizona will grow tired of their affiliation with the Big 12 -- probably sooner than later. I think Coach Whit is already rethinking the long-term veracity of that alignment. 

Assuming those schools don't find their way into the B1G 10, those three are likely to find their way back into PAC membership. Oh, not this year and maybe not even this decade -- but, eventually, those large public research institutions are going to find their way either into the BIG 10, or back home to the PAC.

Just my long-term prediction. 

Ultimately, the Utes are going to find out they don't have much in common with schools like WVU, Cincy, and UCF. They also have very little in common with religious schools like BYU and TCU. So, yeah, I think the long-term destiny for those schools is to make it to the BIG 10, or come back home to the PAC. 

It’s going to be particularly frustrating for Utah and the Arizona schools because while they may feel that way they’ll be losing a lot to those schools.. tough place to be.

[agswin]

I can very much see UU/BYU/ASU/UofA growing a bit weary after a time and really wondering where this is all headed..

The Big12 is going to be a grind, but they are also going to be pulling in enough dough that it is going to take a while before they are ready to pull completely pull up stakes.

But then when they lose the Big Dogs off to the B1G.  That's going to hurt.

And The PAC certainly ain't what it once was w/o USC/UCLA/UO/UW.

So one has to wonder...

Is this really what they all signed for?

 

[SteedLaw]

On 6/25/2024 at 1:01 PM, alum93 said:

You are a USU fan.  They will be in the same boat as NMSU and every other G5 school.  The price to compete in the new super conferences will be so high for football that it will make no sense to even try.  And that includes every MWC school.  My guess is the cut off number will be in the 50-65 range.  Assuming no P4 teams drop down, at the highest it will be in the 60s.  If the very bottom of P4 don't make the cut, possibly 50s, but i doubt it.  If i had to take one school that could possibly make the jump, and it would be based on surrounding market and a strong basketball history, i would place my bet on SDSU.  But even then, i think it's very unlikely anyone gets a call up in the future.  There is no point in having any split at all if you keep 96-114 teams.  Might as well just have current FBS at that point.  And since football is driving this bus,  i can't see how any G5 school in a small market with football stadiums that sit 30k could possibly justify the higher cost.  And there are many of those out there, including USU and NMSU.  USU sits 25.5k and NMSU sits 28.9k per Google.  UNM sits 39.2k.  What do the P4 schools in Utah sit?  54.4k and 63.5k for Utah and BYU.  How would you make up the revenue for stadiums with double your capacity and higher ticket prices?  It's a G5 vs P4 thing, specifically football which drove the realignments the last few years.  NIL and unlimited transfer and play just put the gap between the have and have nots on steroids.

There is a reason WSU and OSU were the last ones left behind.  They just happened to be in the PAC when it fell apart.  Had it been the ACC or B12 and the PAC was the one poaching, you can bet there would be some small market teams that would have been sweating in those conferences.

I just don’t buy this viewpoint at all. Look, I know that is what the talking heads on the networks are selling…but they are PAID to say this. 
 

There are things in this world that are much easier said than done, and I am just not buying it. For starters, it takes a LOT to keep a good dog down. Just this week, USU athletics announced a $125MM fundraising campaign. Word on the street is they have already collected more than half that amount…in less than a week. 
 

Moreover, most of the schools we are talking about are major government institutions. Those institutions (a) have a lot of friends and (b) even more power. And, yes, I am talking about power that could make some of these networks start peeing their pants-type power.
 

So, yes, well aware of what the talking heads and the networks are selling. VERY skeptical they will be able to achieve everything they set out to achieve. In legal practice, we call that their “best day in court”. You are suggesting the P4 take this to no more than 60 or so teams (I.e., the equivalent of the P4’s “best day in court”) all the while discounting the amount of serious controversy among major power players this will cause? Yeah, not on your life.

Look, the P4 will succeed a little in widening the gap. They will also succeed in blowing up a few FBS conferences and throwing maybe even 30-50 teams overboard with them. But I am calling it right now that taking FBS to under 80 teams will prove to be an absolute impossibility for the P4 — and you can count on it.
 

Just watch. In the end there will be a reality check and a “settlement” that will allow at least the PAC/MWC and the American to stay “in” — at least at some relevant level of participation.

[Beaver-Poke]

If I am Utah, the Arizonas and Colorado, I look at the football schedule and go, "WTF were we thinking?" The only game that moves the needle even a little bit is Utah-BYU.

No more USC. No more Washington. No more Oregon. No more UCLA (yeah, they sucked, but UCLA is still a huge name in college athletics). But hey, enjoy those big intersectional games with WVU, Cincinnati, UCF and Iowa State. Scintillating. 

[SteedLaw]

On 6/25/2024 at 7:09 PM, Beaver-Poke said:

If I am Utah, the Arizonas and Colorado, I look at the football schedule and go, "WTF were we thinking?" The only game that moves the needle even a little bit is Utah-BYU.

No more USC. No more Washington. No more Oregon. No more UCLA (yeah, they sucked, but UCLA is still a huge name in college athletics). But hey, enjoy those big intersectional games with WVU, Cincinnati, UCF and Iowa State. Scintillating. 

Bingo. My thoughts exactly. My guess is there is already some real buyers remorse setting in. 

[NevadaFan]

On 6/25/2024 at 6:26 PM, SteedLaw said:

Bingo. My thoughts exactly. My guess is there is already some real buyers remorse setting in. 

I don’t think most of the programs who moved had a choice. Move or be left out. 

[SteedLaw]

https://www.sportico.com/business/commerce/2023/college-sports-finances-database-intercollegiate-1234646029/
 

Also, I think this list is really relevant to the discussion of “the future of FBS”. 
 

This is a list of at least all the public schools in FBS and their related program expenditures of their athletic departments. 
 

First, please take into consideration this is just the public schools — FBS private school expenditures are not listed. 
 

Second, recognize that this is in total dollars without, say cost of living adjustments — since a dollar spent in Pullman goes a lot farther than a dollar spent in LA. 
 

But, you can see what I am saying. It is not unreachable for schools, say, in the middle of the list, to quickly move to higher tiers. A single large donation or campaign could easily cover the relevant gaps. Also, I think anyone on this list with annual expenditures of $50MM or more would likely be included in whatever comes next for FBS. 
 

I mean, sure, if my team were in the bottom 30 or so on this list, then I might be a little worried. I might also be really worried if my team were in the bottom 15-20 on this list. However, the only MWC in the prior category is SJSU and there are no MWC teams in the latter category. 
 

So, yeah, I am not really worried whether pretty much all the MWC is going to make it through to the future of FBS.

 

[Beaver-Poke]

On 6/25/2024 at 6:38 PM, NevadaFan said:

I don’t think most of the programs who moved had a choice. Move or be left out. 

The remorse is, they didn't work hard enough to keep the Pac together. Even after the SoCal schools left, it was very viable. Losing Colorado was not a blow at all, the Buffs were a non-factor in the Pac.

The remorse is listening to that idiot prof from Utah who advised his president to kill the $30 million ESPN deal because he valued the media rights at $50 million per school. One of many mistakes, not the least of which was having the commissioner answer to the presidents, who don't know shit about college athletics, and not the ADs, who are paid big money to know exactly what is happening.  

[Wyobraska]

On 6/25/2024 at 6:41 PM, SteedLaw said:

I just don’t buy this viewpoint at all. Look, I know that is what the talking heads on the networks are selling…but they are PAID to say this. 
 

There are things in this world that are much easier said than done, and I am just not buying it. For starters, it takes a LOT to keep a good dog down. Just this week, USU athletics announced a $125MM fundraising campaign. Word on the street is they have already collected more than half that amount…in less than a week. 
 

Moreover, most of the schools we are talking about are major government institutions. Those institutions (a) have a lot of friends and (b) even more power. And, yes, I am talking about power that could make some of these networks start peeing their pants-type power.
 

So, yes, well aware of what the talking heads and the networks are selling. VERY skeptical they will be able to achieve everything they set out to achieve. In legal practice, we call that their “best day in court”. You are suggesting the P4 take this to no more than 60 or so teams (I.e., the equivalent of the P4’s “best day in court”) all the while discounting the amount of serious controversy among major power players this will cause? Yeah, not on your life.

Look, the P4 will succeed a little in widening the gap. They will also succeed in blowing up a few FBS conferences and throwing maybe even 30-50 teams overboard with them. But I am calling it right now that taking FBS to under 80 teams will prove to be an absolute impossibility for the P4 — and you can count on it.
 

Just watch. In the end there will be a reality check and a “settlement” that will allow at least the PAC/MWC and the American to stay “in” — at least at some relevant level of participation.

My question is, is it worth it to G5 schools?  Do universities benefit that much from being in FBS or the highest equivalent level?

I'm to the point of rather watch USU and Wyoming and the rest of the G5 merge with the top of the FCS and have their own playoff.  

[SteedLaw]

On 6/25/2024 at 8:44 PM, Wyobraska said:

My question is, is it worth it to G5 schools?  Do universities benefit that much from being in FBS or the highest equivalent level?

I'm to the point of rather watch USU and Wyoming and the rest of the G5 merge with the top of the FCS and have their own playoff.  

I hear you. And, if it were up to me, I probably would just agree with you. (Long live Bridget’s Battle!)

However, I am pretty certain my school/team is all the way “in”.

This:

https://www.deseret.com/sports/2024/06/22/utah-state-aggies-historic-fundraising-campaign/

Rumor has it, that USU has already raised more than half this amount…in less than three days.

So, yeah, for USU, there appears to be no turning back now. 

[Wyobraska]

On 6/25/2024 at 7:26 PM, SteedLaw said:

Bingo. My thoughts exactly. My guess is there is already some real buyers remorse setting in. 

 

On 6/25/2024 at 7:38 PM, NevadaFan said:

I don’t think most of the programs who moved had a choice. Move or be left out. 

 

On 6/25/2024 at 7:54 PM, Beaver-Poke said:

The remorse is, they didn't work hard enough to keep the Pac together. Even after the SoCal schools left, it was very viable. Losing Colorado was not a blow at all, the Buffs were a non-factor in the Pac.

The remorse is listening to that idiot prof from Utah who advised his president to kill the $30 million ESPN deal because he valued the media rights at $50 million per school. One of many mistakes, not the least of which was having the commissioner answer to the presidents, who don't know shit about college athletics, and not the ADs, who are paid big money to know exactly what is happening.  

I don't think holding the PAC together was ever a viable long term strategy though was it?  

Once USC and UCLA left, it was too much.  They never would have agreed to $30 million per year when other schools were making much more.  Even if the PAC could have held for a little while after they left, Oregon and Washington would have found a way to the B1G at some point.  

With those 4 schools gone, you wouldn't get $30 million per year and then other schools would have been unhappy.  

[Destiny Dutch]

On 6/25/2024 at 3:06 PM, Raz said:

Good insights.  Utah, Colorado and the ASU and Zona are prime candidates to return to a reformed PAC.  

Colorado went back home to the Big 12.

Arizona always wanted to play in a conference that is capable of getting 10 bids every year. The Big 12 is a monster.

Arizona State and Arizona are tied at the hip. Same BOR.

Utah hates BYU. BYU hates Utah. Therein lies the crux. They are better together but the hate is real.

A reformed Pac 12 is going to happen, and probably soon. However, this is what we are hearing on that front...

Wazzu Bound on X: "PAC-2 is rumored to expand to 8 teams. My outlook Washington State Oregon State San Diego State Boise State Fresno State UNLV Memphis Tulane https://t.co/1gv86YsoBg" / X

[SteedLaw]

On 6/25/2024 at 9:47 PM, Destiny Dutch said:

A reformed Pac 12 is going to happen, and probably soon. However, this is what we are hearing on that front...

Wazzu Bound on X: "PAC-2 is rumored to expand to 8 teams. My outlook Washington State Oregon State San Diego State Boise State Fresno State UNLV Memphis Tulane https://t.co/1gv86YsoBg" / X

Yeah…and my rumor (confirmed) is that Wazzu and OSU are in zero position to even try anything like this, nor do they have the money. There is as much of a chance of a reformed PAC as you bagging Taylor Swift, JLo, Shakira, and Scarlett Johansen in one night.

And, what is with people and the hard-on for Tulane anyway? Do people understand that Tulane is a tiny medical college on the other side of the country with facilities akin to a local Jr. High School? Like, what do they think they are getting with a Tulane membership? 
 

 

I mean, if you squeeze in real tight you could fit…DOZENS of people in that there arena! 

You know it is deep fake when people start mentioning Tulane in the same breath as Wazzu…just saying. 

 

[Did I hear a WOOSH?]

On 6/25/2024 at 9:09 PM, Beaver-Poke said:

If I am Utah, the Arizonas and Colorado, I look at the football schedule and go, "WTF were we thinking?" The only game that moves the needle even a little bit is Utah-BYU.

No more USC. No more Washington. No more Oregon. No more UCLA (yeah, they sucked, but UCLA is still a huge name in college athletics). But hey, enjoy those big intersectional games with WVU, Cincinnati, UCF and Iowa State. Scintillating. 

WVU might be more fun than any of those schools.  They party hard.

[Destiny Dutch]

On 6/25/2024 at 11:19 PM, SteedLaw said:

Yeah…and my rumor (confirmed) is that Wazzu and OSU are in zero position to even try anything like this, nor do they have the money. There is as much of a chance of a reformed PAC as you bagging Taylor Swift, JLo, Shakira, and Scarlett Johansen in one night.

And, what is with people and the hard-on for Tulane anyway? Do people understand that Tulane is a tiny medical college on the other side of the country with facilities akin to a local Jr. High School? Like, what do they think they are getting with a Tulane membership? 
 

 

I mean, if you squeeze in real tight you could fit…DOZENS of people in that there arena! 

You know it is deep fake when people start mentioning Tulane in the same breath as Wazzu…just saying. 

 

 

 

[Raz]

BINGO!

 

 

[Chalsean]

There literally is no reporting, no facts or figures or sources presented.  Just some dude spewing his thoughts.  His views have no more credibility than yours or mine.

[alum93]

On 6/25/2024 at 7:41 PM, SteedLaw said:

https://www.sportico.com/business/commerce/2023/college-sports-finances-database-intercollegiate-1234646029/
 

Also, I think this list is really relevant to the discussion of “the future of FBS”. 
 

This is a list of at least all the public schools in FBS and their related program expenditures of their athletic departments. 
 

First, please take into consideration this is just the public schools — FBS private school expenditures are not listed. 
 

Second, recognize that this is in total dollars without, say cost of living adjustments — since a dollar spent in Pullman goes a lot farther than a dollar spent in LA. 
 

But, you can see what I am saying. It is not unreachable for schools, say, in the middle of the list, to quickly move to higher tiers. A single large donation or campaign could easily cover the relevant gaps. Also, I think anyone on this list with annual expenditures of $50MM or more would likely be included in whatever comes next for FBS. 
 

I mean, sure, if my team were in the bottom 30 or so on this list, then I might be a little worried. I might also be really worried if my team were in the bottom 15-20 on this list. However, the only MWC in the prior category is SJSU and there are no MWC teams in the latter category. 
 

So, yeah, I am not really worried whether pretty much all the MWC is going to make it through to the future of FBS.

 

If the entire MWC makes some cut in the future, then i am not worried about my school either.  But i also think most if not all G5 schools will remain at what is currently known as FBS and the P4 will create a new level.  I think some of the current P4 schools might even be left out like WSU and OSU were when the PAC fell apart.   Best guess and it hasn't changed in the last year is that a split will be close to 50/50 when all is said and done, which is basically what the numbers are now for P4 and G5 schools.

[agswin]

I, for one, am in favor of building up the reputation and standing of the MWC while keeping the lines of communication/brotherhood open with schools like WSU/OSU that may have reasons to wish to affiliate with the MWC in the future.

I have no wish to get stuck paying silly conference exit fees, for a conference that does not even really exist anymore, but if they are a fit academically, geographically, and in terms of shared mission, let's make the connections and get the job done.

It is apparent that these 2 universities, in particular, have a lot in common with many Mountain West Conference Institutions.  Let's be doing our part as a conference to make the connections happen.

In terms of their Agriculture and Natural Resources-based educational history/pedigree, it seems like a nice match.

 

[Spaztecs]

On 6/23/2024 at 10:53 AM, Beaver-Poke said:

No shit. I get it. But the Pac name has the brand, history and name recognition and it would be foolish to change it. 

In it's last version, the Pac became a laughing stock, the butt of numerous jokes, and is now viewed as a ridiculous meme for how not to grow a Conference. The BigXII has more cache than ever.

Had the Pac stayed together the name would still have some cache.