wardly

Smith also said Stanford will make another run at the BIG 10 as well. And no, I don't think Stanford wants to play school in the AAC that they feel are academically beneath them. I could swear that I read a statement from Aresco that said something to the effect that he had a schedule worked out for Stanford . Who knows, but if they come on board I would expect them and Cal to get preferential treatment.

So I just listened to Trey Smith's Thursday podcast. Smith says that Cal and Stanford are one vote short on admittance into the ACC and will put on a full court press for admittance this coming week. He also says that Stanford has expressed zero interest in rebuilding the PAC 12 and if denied entrance into ACC will probably go independent. However, in conference realignment you start off trying to do what you want to do but sometimes end up doing what you have to do. If the PAC 4 reloads their AAC targets are SMU,Rice, Tulane, and USF. They would pause and fill in with MWC programs in 2025. Smith is not concerned that the loss of 4 programs will destroy the AAC, as the buyout money will help existing members continue to invest in their programs and entice potential candidate for membership. Smith also thinks the best scenario for the PAC 4 is to join the AAC, who has an existing ESPN contract with an increased payout option for adding new members that bring value. However Aresco told the PAC 4 that its all of them or none of them. In my personal opinion this is a negotiating ploy to encourage Cal, OSU, and WSU to put pressure on Stanford to stay and rebuild the conference, but what do I know. Interesting times.

From what I read high school participation has dropped in California as well as attendance at college football games.The straw that broke the camels back for the PAC 12 was when the presidents decided that their conference was worth BIG 10 money and turned down BIG 12 money. Wrong.

Drop Charlotte , add Colorado State and this might actually work out.

Stanford will kick Cal to the curb in a heartbeat if it gets them into the ACC. Cal can't afford to not play for pay.

Guys, this is just another news report that may or not be true. However the president of OSU said they were going forward with rebuilding the PAC 12, and Andrew Luck is adviser to the Beavers, so maybe, just maybe, there is some truth to this report. I am going to listen to Trey Smith and hopefully get his take on the lay of the land, which changes daily

Well another news report [ 20 hours ago] says that the AAC will dissolve and 11 schools will join the PAC 12.UNT, UTSA, Rice, UAB, and FAU will receive less media money to pay exit fees for SDSU, Boise, and CSU who will join in 2025. Charlotte and Wichita are SOL.

With University ranking of 263 I would be surprised if Memphis is included. The PAC 4 would need only 4 AAC programs for now and in 2025 could add SDSU and a school to be named later.

Well, probably to no ones surprise I am confused as to Andrew Luck's actual roll in the PAC 4. I watched Trey Smith's Podcast last night and he interviewed a personal friend [ whose name escapes me] of Lucks who said that Luck at this time is representing OSU and WSU only and not Cal or Stanford. However, this could change.This is a college friend whose career is in media and was told this personally by Luck. I also watched Harry interview Smith who thinks that the AAC commissioner will not drop any existing AAC members in order to gain the remaining PAC 4 programs. Smith is really high on Aresco and thinks he is doing a great job. For those of us who are interested in " all things AAC " I would strongly recommend that you follow Trey Smith.

Sorry, my bad. Arthritis in the hands is a bitch. But while I have you,in my opinion the administration at SDSU really dodged a bullet. It would have been a pisser to have paid $17 million to join the PAC 12 and then have it blow up, and even worse if they had left the MWC without an invitation in hand, which to my knowledge was never offered. While they may have done their due diligence regarding the stability of the PAC 12 after the loss of USC and UCLA, no one could have predicted that the conference would lose 5 members in basically one day. Just ask the remaining 4 schools. Personally I think that the Aztecs would have done anything to join the PAC 12 but were saved by dumb luck. Now if the PAC 12 and AAC join forces will SDSU be as passionate about gaining entry in the future? Who knows. Certainly not me.

Again, from what I read the members of the MVC are handcuffed by their $34 million exit fee. However, the AAC exit fee is mush less, about $10 million. If the PAC 4 is looking to add 4 AAC members based upon market size, then SMU,UTSA,Rice, and USF might be their choices since geography, logic and reason no longer prevail in conference realignment. However, with no media contract, why would AAC members jump to the PAC 4? Even if they do get one how much better would it be than ours? In addition ,you would be joining the PAC 4 knowing that Stanford and Cal are gone as soon as they can and you gave up the security of the AAC to partner with OSU and WSU [ Hang on. I know that there is no real security in conference realignment but it just sounded good]. In summary, I can understand while members of the PAC 4 might join the AAC, but can't understand why some of us would want to join them. Its all about risk and reward.

I read that Comcast is going after all of the PAC 12 schools, not just the remaining 4, for repayment of the over payment. What a mess.

From what I read Luck, who is who the PAC 12 should if hired in the 1st place as commissioner, is exploring options for the remaining 4 programs. His first hurdle in saving the conference is to put together some type of TV contract that pays as much as the American Athletic Conference , somewhere if the $10 million plus range. Without one the PAC 12 conference is dead . If he can get one, which is a big if, then they can add 4 AAC programs now and a few MWC schools later. If not, then the PAC 4 can decide to go independent or join the AAC . The only 2 schools who might chose the independent rout are Stanford and Cal, and Cal has major financial problems in their athletic department. If appears the the MWC is a no go because of the length of their media contract and the fact it only pays $4 million a year,. On the other hand the AAC has an option in their media contract that they can renegotiate if they bring in new members that increases the conference's value. Isn't this fun.

Who really knows ? It sounds farfetched but UTSA as a PAC 4 target does as well.

The 6 new additions, UNT, UTSA, FAU, Charlotte, UAB and Rice would probably be the schools on the endangered list. If the PAC 4 takes all the programs that were in the conference before Cincy, Houston , and UCF left, which 3 of the recent additions are taken which gets them to 11 yes votes? NOT Charlotte, FAU or UNT, so it could happen unless the AAC says all or nothing as the MWC did, which got them dropped as a potential landing spot for all 4 PAC programs.

I don't really have a clue about what will transpire with the PAC 4 but a few things seem obvious. First, if Cal and Stanford can't gain admittance into the ACC their choices ate to either cobble together a 8 to 12 team conference with OSU and WSU. Second, no way UNT or UTSA will be invited. Just a guess but SMU,Rice, and Tulane get first draw.Third, the new PAC 4 back fills with SDSU and maybe maybe another one or two MWC as soon as they figure how how to break their $34 million buyout. Basically the PAC 4 just needs another 4 programs now for their conference to survive and can fill in a few other schools later. Stay tuned.

SMU has the money to play athletics, which we don't. In addition, we really are not in Dallas or Ft. Worth markets. We are just an after though. I would doubt UTSA fits the PAC 4 profile, but SMU,Tulane, Rice certainly do.

I really don't know. Basically the PAC 12 wanted BIG 10 money without UCLA and USC. The BIG 12, without Texas and Oklahoma, was offered about the same amount the PAC 12 turned down and took it. After that ESPN wasn't really interested in the PAC 12.

So I read that the Presidents of the PAC 12 members turned down $30 million per school and told ESPN they wanted $50 million even though USC and UCLA had left. The BIG 12 jumped in front of them and took the $30 million. With Texas and Oklahoma departing the conference recognized their true value while the PAC 12 Presidents did not. After that ESPN was no longer interested in the PAC 12.

I don't think they want all of us either.

I guess it comes with being 80

On the other hand, the PAC 4 offers Mike Aresco their commissioners job and he brings 8 AAC schools with him. How about SMU, Rice, Tulane, USF, Navy, Temple,Memphis, Tulsa ? Maybe UTSA because of market size instead of Tulsa.

I don't see how the PAC 4 can cherry pick the MWC with their $34 million penalty to leave. However they could cherry pick the AAC with their $10 million penalty which would probably leave us out. Just a guess, but the only reason we were invited into the AAC was a hedge against SMU leaving. However if the PAC 4 raids the AAC for 6 to 8 schools I just don't see us as one of them. I would rather go back to the Sun Belt than CUSA.

They had a good team last year. Fairly new coach and I think went to a bowl game. When you look at the 1AA programs we have on our future schedule its hard to complain about a good Sun Belt Team.

Thanks. I assumed TV was the problem, but its a good problem to have.