JimboF

I guess one way to prevent Texas State from potentially "leapfrogging" North Texas and joining the Pac is to invite them into the AAC. Texas State would assuredly love to be in the same conference with North Texas, UTSA, and Rice. However, maybe the best long-term option for both Texas State and North Texas involves joining the Pac as a pair.

As for Cal and Stanford, it seems like their situation may be untenable in the long run. It may not happen, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them eventually join the new Pac rather than continuing to travel as much as a commercial flight crew.

I understand the attraction of playing against Memphis and Tulane, but I'm thinking those two schools might join the ACC in the not-too-distant future, especially if FSU, Clemson, and UNC join the SEC or Big Ten. If and when Memphis and Tulane depart, the AAC won't be nearly as desirable, and the Pac option would look outstanding for North Texas. The thing about the Pac is many of its schools will be almost impossible for another conference to poach based on their western geography. It certainly seems that the setup of USC, UCLA, Oregon, and Washington will be the exception rather than otherwise. I really believe that the newly configured Pac will have loads of staying power.

Perhaps North Texas could provide more than two years' notice to the AAC, in which case the AAC exit fee may be reduced to a much more reasonable amount.

So what's the general consensus on this site regarding North Texas' desire to join the Pac?

Don't get me wrong, I like the North Texas football stadium better than the Alamodome. Nevertheless, there is certainly something to be said for saving hundreds of millions of dollars and renting a nearby stadium instead. It frees up money for other expenditures.

I think UTSA is somewhat fortunate, because they didn't have to pay for a football stadium to be constructed, and they just rent the Alamodome instead. That's the type of factor that can dramatically change the overall finances of an athletic department and make it more plausible to cobble together the AAC exit fee.

I agree that UTSA will have a major issue dealing with the AAC buyout, but you never know, where there's a will, there's a way.

So does that mean the Easter Bunny decided North Texas shouldn't have a baseball team?

By the way, is there any particular reason North Texas doesn't have a baseball team, which might actually matter to some Pac members?

I wouldn't say it's a duplication, because UTSA is in San Antonio, while San Marcos is considered part of the Austin metropolitan area. Perhaps that's "splitting hairs," but nonetheless, the San Antonio and Austin combined metropolitan populations exceed five million people, which is more than enough people to provide ample interest in those two athletic departments. I could be wrong, but I think it'll be those two rather than North Texas or Rice.

I think neither Texas State nor UTSA is more deserving of a place in the newly configured Pac than North Texas. However, Texas State can exit the Sun Belt with minimal difficulty (low buyout), which gives the Bobcats an inside track. It also seems like UTSA as a whole is more interested than North Texas in moving to the Pac (despite public denials). Furthermore, I think Texas State's rivalry with UTSA would prove useful/meaningful to the Pac, in addition to providing for really easy travel between San Marcos and San Antonio. I mean, it matters that the distance between Denton and San Marcos is more than 250 miles, whereas the distance between San Antonio and San Marcos is not even 50 miles. Regardless of which school(s) is/are chosen, fans in Texas would be really excited to see Boise State football games in Texas, Gonzaga basketball games in Texas, and Oregon State baseball games in Texas. I know I'd be really interested in traveling to Colorado and San Diego to watch Bobcat athletic teams play road games. Perhaps we won't have to wait much longer to see what happens.

I think Texas State and UTSA will join the Pac. Those two schools have a pretty good rivalry, they both seem to be improving in general, and their campuses are only about 45 miles apart. Thus, other conference members could visit the Austin-San Antonio corridor and get multiple games with minimal travel issues.

I should also mention that it seems like the newly configured Pac will be very stable for a long time, maybe even several or more decades. I can't think of any members that will have "wandering eyes." Perhaps just as importantly, based on the geographical locations of most Pac schools, it seems highly unlikely that any of them will get swiped by another conference. Thus, if North Texas and Texas State want the best stability and competition they can get, it definitely seems like the Pac is the way to go. It won't hurt North Texas and Texas State to increase their recruits from California either.

As a Texas State alumnus (graduate school) and fan, I'd love to see North Texas and Texas State in the new Pac really soon. Texas State has wanted to be a member of the AAC for years, but their exclusion actually makes it much, much easier for them to join the Pac from a financial perspective (lower exit fees). North Texas will have to contend with the expensive AAC exit fees if it chooses to join the Pac too, but perhaps North Texas has a few "deep-pocketed" donors willing to assist with that. Having Texas State and North Texas in the Pac means western members of that conference would be able to travel to Texas and play two conference games (in sports other than football) rather than just one, which makes quite a difference with regard to travel/scheduling. Heck, there's even a small chance that California might get tired of that ACC travel and join the Pac too. I'm eager to see what happens!