Green Otaku

SMU to the PAC. Arizona, ASU, Utah to Big12. Oregon, Wash. to the Big10. Stanford and Cal go indy in football, WCC in olympic sports. The rest of the MWC is invited to join the PAC. But WSU and OSU go indy in football, and olympic sports in PAC. AAC takes CSU and AF. PAC adds UTEP and NMSU.

You either quoted the wrong person, or misread my post. I was talking about Colorado.

The risk of moving without any information just seems too great to me. I feel like Colorado did everything to try to stay, but saw that what was possible wasn't enough. I think if we see more movement happen soon it's a good sign that teams have seen the numbers and that those numbers aren't very good.

Kudos for taking the ribbing in good stride. I think the real lynch pin here is, did Colorado see actual numbers from the media rights deal? If they did and that's what caused them to move then it's done for the PAC. I would guess yes, IMO they don't take such a huge risk and move without concrete evidence. I feel like everyone knew that Colorado wanted to stay with the west coast schools, so the details must be pretty stark if it forced their hand. If there was a chance that they would have made the same amount of $$$ or close to the Big12 I think they stay.

You were so sure too.

I'll attempt to answer 2 of your questions. They are bleeding money because the era of free money is over. For a long time the interest rate on loans has been near 0%, in the past year the Fed has had 10 rate hikes and the rate is now at 5.5%, this is an effort to slow inflation and to slow the economy down. Yes the government wants there to be less money and less spending. Every sector was expected to have cuts and layoffs. Eventually if things return to normal rates will drop back down, companies will begin to spend more and we will go back to steady growth. Essentially the PAC couldn't have chosen a worse time to have to negotiate a deal. It's important for the AAC because the AAC is a known conference that builds up brands. Look at Houston, how long ago was it that people said Houston doesn't carry the Houston market? Look at it now, the program has strong support from the city. Look at Cincy, and UCF. Being in a big metro was a key point to bring in fans and interest when these teams started to make noise nationally.

If Texas recruiting was that important to them they'ed already be here. AAC when it started wasn't enough for Boise/SDSU, and wasn't enough again when they tried to lure AF and CSU.

Isn't that just some random guy on twitter? I don't think he has any legit sources.

USC/UCLA also didn't pay exit fees. With no new media deal signed any team is free to go in 2024 as long as they don't sign the new deal.

Oregon, Oregon State, and Arizona are also reported to have emergency meetings tomorrow as well.

It's looking like an almost sure thing. I say "almost" because you never know with these things until an official announcement is made. But with this many sources reporting it there is too much smoke for there not to be a fire.

I'm cool with SJSU, North Alabama..... not so much. I'm of the mind that any FBS game is better than an FCS one.

I saw this on their socials the other day. Is it just new panels for the jumbo?

It's also funny seeing SMU/SDSU posters on different boards coming to the defense of the Pac12.

I love hearing first hand accounts of things, mostly because I feel like our AD is not very open to sharing gritty details. I wish more posters on this board would share these insights.

Not the first time it's been talked about. This tweet came out quite a few days ago. Notice it says a more substantive framework will be presented on their media day, not that any kind of deal or even numbers/final numbers would be presented. There is no concrete info on a date and everyone is just guessing. So take the good and bad reports with a huge grain of salt, as most things out are best guesses.

The Big12 is not going to vote in a team that would lower their payout, and I don't think the networks are willing to take SDSU at a full share so no, I don't see it happening.

I figured it was a money issue. We should have done everything we could to make it close to that, even if it meant doing it in phases or building the endzone at a future time.

I still remember the video they used to promote the stadium vote, and how excited I was about how the stadium looked. That is what we should have gotten.

You are publicly airing out some of the internal issues of the PAC, further damaging it's perception while it's under media negotiations. Maybe only to a small degree, but even so you don't give the media more fuel to an already sensitive topic. Imagine if you interviewed someone for a new job, then you tell them to wait for a followup call. Then that person calls you and says they told their current job they were planning on leaving, so let them know when they get the job. I'd be pissed and embarrassed if UNT behaved this way.

They do. SDSU knew and was told that any expansion decision would come after the media rights deal was made. The PAC has to get everything in order to present numbers and scenarios to its members. The PAC has been under tremendous pressure and scrutiny from the media, they don't need SDSU adding fuel to the fire. If they have been inept or not doesn't matter, SDSU went rogue and tried to leverage their way in. How is that not negative?

I'm hoping those are just guide lines to help them paint the logo on level. Also did they use the dark green from the outline of Texas for the star? This better be changed to match the green of the endzones.

I'm surprised they went with white. I was sure it would be a green A with white trim.

I struggle to understand your posts sometimes, I can't be the only one on this board. We are saying the same thing: SDSU made a huge mistake and should kept their mouth shut.