SMU potentially to the PAC-12

[ADLER]

37 minutes ago, NT80 said:

When the PAC loses all but Wash St, Ore St then they will keep the name and backfill with as many from the MWC that want to join.  PAC-lite.

Not entirely accurate. The Pac12 will be losing the NCAA Tourney credits, and that's inevitable. A conference must maintain at least six schools together for a tree year period to retain earned tourney revenue and an auto-bid to the NCAA tournament. Anything less than six and the revenue is rerouted to the schools that originally earned it.

The result would be that WSU, OSU, SMU, and SDSU would actually have to join the MWC and then rename that as the Pac12. That way they could keep the Mountain West auto-bid. It takes 3 years to re-earn an auto-bid. An exception was made when the MWC split from the WAC, several lower conferences complained, and the NCAA stated it would never happen again. This is good news for dregs like SJSU that would've certainly been left behind if it was just a cherry picking process.

[NT80]

19 minutes ago, ADLER said:

Not entirely accurate. The Pac12 will be losing the NCAA Tourney credits, and that's inevitable. A conference must maintain at least six schools together for a tree year period to retain earned tourney revenue and an auto-bid to the NCAA tournament. Anything less than six and the revenue is rerouted to the schools that originally earned it.

The result would be that WSU, OSU, SMU, and SDSU would actually have to join the MWC and then rename that as the Pac12. That way they could keep the Mountain West auto-bid. It takes 3 years to re-earn an auto-bid. An exception was made when the MWC split from the WAC, several lower conferences complained, and the NCAA stated it would never happen again. This is good news for dregs like SJSU that would've certainly been left behind if it was just a cherry picking process.

No, the NCAA is spineless right now.  They will grandfather and waiver everything to preserve The PAC as an entity and their TV agreements.   The PAC will get million$ in exit fees from the schools leaving and simply restock with MWC moveups.   

[Mike Jackson]

11 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

It's called small privates syndrome and is directly linked to self esteem.

 Man drop the 🎤 and take a victory lap. 😂😂😂😂

[ADLER]

23 minutes ago, NT80 said:

No, the NCAA is spineless right now.  They will grandfather and waiver everything to preserve The PAC as an entity and their TV agreements.   Washington State and Oregon State will get million$ in exit fees from the schools leaving and simply restock with MWC moveups.   

Fixed that for you.

If the Pac12 goes to less than 6 permanent member (together for minimum 3 years) NCAA statutes say that schools like Arizona and UCLA would get to keep their own earned tourney money. Under what basis could the NCAA keep them from having it?

[Wag Tag]

5 minutes ago, ADLER said:

Fixed that for you.

If the Pac12 goes to less than 6 permanent member (together for minimum 3 years) NCAA statutes say that schools like Arizona and UCLA would get to keep their own earned tourney money. Under what basis could the NCAA keep them from having it?

Any current rules or regulations, please throw them out the widow!  It just doesn’t matter.

[Mike Jackson]

5 hours ago, Coffee and TV said:

Whole lotta people in this thread pretending they wouldn't be just as happy with a PAC12 invite as pony fans are. Stop lying to yourselves, it's not healthy.  

Without UCLA & USC plus Washington and Oregon on their way out, that isn’t exactly the "Pac 12" I or any other Mean Green fan dreamed of joining.  Watching UNT play a Cal Bears team that hasn't been ranked in a decade at 9:30 PM on Friday or Saturday night is not my idea of appointments TV.   And we DEFINITELY aren't going to a SMU board to crow about it.  We have the crazy idea that playing and beating higher profile teams in our region annually in Denton is the goal (short of championships, playoff appearances and high profile bowl victories), not conference affiliation to get coaches and support staff  bigger paychecks for fielding mediocre teams.  I learned my lesson in regards to conference affiliation with our move to CUSA.  If you aren't winning championships or playing higher profile regional teams then conference affiliation does little for the fan experience.  Hell a 25 year home and home series with Boise State as they climbed to prominence (grabbing at least 7 victories over that time)  from our shared time in the Big West would have been far more enjoyable than our times playing UAB and Southern Miss in CUSA.   And those 2 series were the highlight of what we gained as fans from the CUSA tenure.
 

 In summary if you aren't beating teams local casual fans care about what are you actually achieving from a market impact perspective?   Very little is my answer unless you have a 4 year run of ending seasons ranked in the top 25 and in discussion for a playoff birth:
If I extend all these SMU supporters and apologist a hearty congratulations for their ascension to the ranks of P5 also rans will they go to SMU board and entertain the crickets hanging on their every word?

[DentonStang]

1 hour ago, ADLER said:

Not entirely accurate. The Pac12 will be losing the NCAA Tourney credits, and that's inevitable. A conference must maintain at least six schools together for a tree year period to retain earned tourney revenue and an auto-bid to the NCAA tournament. Anything less than six and the revenue is rerouted to the schools that originally earned it.

The result would be that WSU, OSU, SMU, and SDSU would actually have to join the MWC and then rename that as the Pac12. That way they could keep the Mountain West auto-bid. It takes 3 years to re-earn an auto-bid. An exception was made when the MWC split from the WAC, several lower conferences complained, and the NCAA stated it would never happen again. This is good news for dregs like SJSU that would've certainly been left behind if it was just a cherry picking process.

If we have to milk the MWC we wouldn't be joining, we'd be raiding the best of the MWC and the best of the western AAC schools like UTSA and Tulane or someone 

[southsideguy]

I hope smut gets there dream and they go to the pac 12.  If they do that we might as well stop playing them.  They bring no fans to Denton.  I know our crowd increases when we play them.  I just grow tired of the holy than now attitude.  Who needs that.  They will fit well into California. they will get big crowds with some of the schools of course but some will not move the needle for them.  If Oregon and Washington leave who will replace them?  SDSU maybe UNLV which will not be draws for SMUT.  Besides it would be nice to see other teams come to town.

 

Just a side note UTEP fan forum is really bringing the hate on us.  I dont know what got up their ass.  If I read between the lines from there posts it because they got left behind in Judy's world.

Edited February 9, 2023 by southsideguy

[DentonStang]

10 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

If we have to milk the MWC we wouldn't be joining, we'd be raiding the best of the MWC and the best of the western AAC schools like UTSA and Tulane or someone 

Damn, really, PAC getting raided would be the worst possible outcome for UNT.  We'd raid the best of MWC and AAC.  Who would you backfill with?  You'd lose Navy too as they only joined the AAC to play Texas schools.  What Texas schools would you have other than yourself?  Maybe UTEP?

You'd be reduced from the best conference you've ever been in to probably the worst, at least since going FBS.

To wish your success, you have to wish our success. There's got to be a name for that arrangement.  Anti-schadenfreude?

Edited February 9, 2023 by DentonStang

[ADLER]

19 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

If we have to milk the MWC we wouldn't be joining, we'd be raiding the best of the MWC and the best of the western AAC schools like UTSA and Tulane or someone 

If, as predicted by many, the 8 schools leave for Big10 & Big12, the 2 Pac orphans would lose their NCAA tourney auto-bid. There's really no way around that. To circumvent that, they'd have to, with SMU, join the MWC. They can then call that cobbled conference the Pac12 but it would be that in name only.

[DentonStang]

15 minutes ago, ADLER said:

If, as predicted by many, the 8 schools leave for Big10 & Big12, the 2 Pac orphans would lose their NCAA tourney auto-bid. There's really no way around that. To circumvent that, they'd have to, with SMU, join the MWC. They can then call that cobbled conference the Pac12 but it would be that in name only.

You don't read much college football outside this board, do you

[YNWA2017]

2 hours ago, NT80 said:

They can already do this.....Cal is playing at Apogee this fall, at Notre Dame last year and at Ole Miss the year before.  

Yes that's true, but those games are scheduled years in advance. Not regular. Cal has played Notre Dame a total of 4 times and Ole Miss 2 times in its entire history. I'm just saying with SMU in the conference, multiple PAC schools/coaches get guaranteed biennial trips to arguably the best recruiting ground in the country with an accessible viewing schedule for everyone. 

[ADLER]

4 hours ago, DentonStang said:

You don't read much college football outside this board, do you

Quote

ESPN is believed to be interested in the Pac-12 because of the "fourth window" -- games that begin after 10 p.m. ET. The network would have a hole in college football broadcast day beginning in 2024 if it does not pick up some Pac-12 games. It already missed out on getting a piece of the Big Ten deal signed with CBS, Fox and NBC.

Does anyone expect that USC and UCLA will not be bringing any of their western rivals to the Big11? With USC and UCLA aboard, the Big10 network partners will need several more western schools to fill their own "fourth window" scheduling. They're securing a lucrative late night demographic that rival SEC just can't match.

If Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal bolt, does anyone not think that the immediate response by the '4 Corners' group will be to jump to the Big12? The Big12 ESPN and Fox media deal will financially dwarf anything that can be cobbled out with backfill from the MWC schools and have far better exposure. The Big12 already has 4 schools located in Texas, would any member vote for more?

Pac-12 in danger of eventual collapse

Pac-12 expansion with San Diego State, SMU may be necessary

 

Watch ALL THREE

Nobody is stalling for a reason, especially like waiting on BIG10 leadership.

As for these SMU fans, they've never been blindsided by the Big Eight, the Airport Six, Catholic Eight.....

It's all going to work out just fine for them. They won't get fooled again.

 

.

Edited February 9, 2023 by ADLER

[UNTethered Eagle]

The fact that smuers come to our board to discuss their football team should be a glaring indication of their fan following.

And if they want to point to our own fan apathy, which is fair, they should realize we care even LESS about them. and certainly about them moving conferences.
 

Maybe this will finally get them close to being like their true idol TCU. Lol

[DentonStang]

I'm all the time I've been following this board, both before and after starting to post, I've never seen an SMU fan bring up attendance/fan apathy smack.  We both know we both have weak attendance.  However, UNT fans constantly being it up, and accuse SMU fans of doing it forming this weird straw-man to argue against.

Similarly every SMU fan posting in the last few days openly acknowledges the possibility of P12 being raided in the future.  But we feel, and I think anyone looking at it rationally feels, that we're still WAY better off in the end.  But here, again, is the weird strawman arguments about B10 fourth-tier rights etc.  Don't care.  We're still WAY better off in any of those scenarios, and even if this things blows up somehow where we are floating without a conference having never played a game in PAC, it was still totally worth the risk.

[dodgefan]

21 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

SMU has been ranked three of the last four years with a 10 win season.  Its not like UNT who hovered around .500 with a DOA coach in Littrell yet somehow got the call up to the AAC.

Surely you have to know UNT got the call, because the AAC commish knew that SMU was probably gone. We should be happy, that UNT will be the only team near the Dallas metroplex in the in the AAC.

[untphd]

40 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

I'm all the time I've been following this board, both before and after starting to post, I've never seen an SMU fan bring up attendance/fan apathy smack.  We both know we both have weak attendance.  However, UNT fans constantly being it up, and accuse SMU fans of doing it forming this weird straw-man to argue against.

Similarly every SMU fan posting in the last few days openly acknowledges the possibility of P12 being raided in the future.  But we feel, and I think anyone looking at it rationally feels, that we're still WAY better off in the end.  But here, again, is the weird strawman arguments about B10 fourth-tier rights etc.  Don't care.  We're still WAY better off in any of those scenarios, and even if this things blows up somehow where we are floating without a conference having never played a game in PAC, it was still totally worth the risk.

And yet you just brought it up.

[UNTethered Eagle]

55 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

I'm all the time I've been following this board, both before and after starting to post, I've never seen an SMU fan bring up attendance/fan apathy smack.  We both know we both have weak attendance.  However, UNT fans constantly being it up, and accuse SMU fans of doing it forming this weird straw-man to argue against.

Similarly every SMU fan posting in the last few days openly acknowledges the possibility of P12 being raided in the future.  But we feel, and I think anyone looking at it rationally feels, that we're still WAY better off in the end.  But here, again, is the weird strawman arguments about B10 fourth-tier rights etc.  Don't care.  We're still WAY better off in any of those scenarios, and even if this things blows up somehow where we are floating without a conference having never played a game in PAC, it was still totally worth the risk.

I personally think you are great, and always share good info without too much bias (we all have it). I have a problem with smu posters calling us delusional on our own fam board when we don’t agree with your take. 
 

Saying this so you know I’m not attacking you personally, or any cordial smu posters.

[dodgefan]

21 minutes ago, UNTethered Eagle said:

I personally think you are great, and always share good info without too much bias (we all have it). I have a problem with smu posters calling us delusional on our own fam board when we don’t agree with your take. 
 

Saying this so you know I’m not attacking you personally, or any cordial smu posters.

I am a regular visitor on other boards like TCU, Tech etc... the 2 or 3 SMU posters that come over here are absolutely charming, compared to what I read on those other boards. lol 

By the way, I'm sure our moderators love the Pony visitors, look at the traffic it creates, by just mentioning the name SMU. The numbers don't lie. I also hope we keep playing them in non conference games once their gone.

Edited February 9, 2023 by dodgefan

[C Rod]

15 hours ago, Wag Tag said:

As stated before, the AAC and MWC should form some type of alliance. Now!

Seeing how the Big10, PAC, & ACC alliance folded like a cheap lawn chair, I don’t see the point of an alliance unless it has real legal consequences. I think the better move is to lure Air Force and CSU to the American. 

[keith]

14 hours ago, GMG_Dallas said:

Which they already have tons of. Generally people want what they don't have, in their case, a college football playoff bid. Guess they can pile more cash on top of the stacks of cash they already have.

Exactly.  It's the same way millionaires become billionaires - or in some cases how billionaires become millionaires 😉 It's the natural order of things.  You always strive for more.  Again, back to the P5/G5 divide.  It's doesn't matter how you get from G5 to P5 or even if you are only there for a couple seasons.  Once you're in, you're in and there are only a few chairs left.  Since we've been talking about college football in these terms, has any P5 dropped down to G5 or been kicked out of the club?  You want in and you should take any path that presents itself.  We would in a nanosecond.

[GMG_Dallas]

15 minutes ago, keith said:

Exactly.  It's the same way millionaires become billionaires - or in some cases how billionaires become millionaires 😉 It's the natural order of things.  You always strive for more.  Again, back to the P5/G5 divide.  It's doesn't matter how you get from G5 to P5 or even if you are only there for a couple seasons.  Once you're in, you're in and there are only a few chairs left.  Since we've been talking about college football in these terms, has any P5 dropped down to G5 or been kicked out of the club?  You want in and you should take any path that presents itself.  We would in a nanosecond.

The landscape is changing. P5 will no longer matter for the college football playoffs. Adding SMU and SDSU is out of desperation for a "power" conference with no playoff team since 2016.

The shift is already happening in basketball where the PAC 12 only gets 2-3 basketball tournament bids per year and that's with USC and UCLA. The MWC has been getting 4.

The only thing this does is bring more money to a program that doesn't need it. Yes, we'd be ecstatic but that's because we lack money and brand name. They don't. SMU going to the PAC 12 is like UT and OU going to the SEC. All it does is complicate their path to a conference championship in exchange for more money.

[SMU2006]

5 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

The landscape is changing. P5 will no longer matter for the college football playoffs. Adding SMU and SDSU is out of desperation for a "power" conference with no playoff team since 2016.

The shift is already happening in basketball where the PAC 12 only gets 2-3 basketball tournament bids per year and that's with USC and UCLA. The MWC has been getting 4.

The only thing this does is bring more money to a program that doesn't need it. Yes, we'd be ecstatic but that's because we lack money and brand name. They don't. SMU going to the PAC 12 is like UT and OU going to the SEC. All it does is complicate their path to a conference championship in exchange for more money.

The playoff is expanding to 12 with six conference champions getting in automatically.  The PAC's place at the table is secure.  Further, they are absolutely going to get a TV deal right in line with the Big 12 in terms of $ per school.  There is no current scenario where it is advantageous for any remaining members to leave.  If the B1G expands then of course all bets are off but Washington and Oregon were both there to be had last summer and the B1G didn't make a move. 

Beyond the simple athletic advantages of moving to the PAC, SMU as a ton of California students and West Coast alumni.  Being associated academically with Stanford, Washington, CAL has real benefits too as opposed to Charlotte, FAU, UAB, ECU, et al.

The fact is SMU and SDSU make a ton of sense for the PAC and both have made the financial commitment to be competitive from the jump.

Edited February 9, 2023 by SMU2006

[SMU2006]

 

29 minutes ago, keith said:

Exactly.  It's the same way millionaires become billionaires - or in some cases how billionaires become millionaires 😉 It's the natural order of things.  You always strive for more.  Again, back to the P5/G5 divide.  It's doesn't matter how you get from G5 to P5 or even if you are only there for a couple seasons.  Once you're in, you're in and there are only a few chairs left.  Since we've been talking about college football in these terms, has any P5 dropped down to G5 or been kicked out of the club?  You want in and you should take any path that presents itself.  We would in a nanosecond.

The last one that comes to mind is Temple getting booted from the Big East in 2004.

[GMG_Dallas]

28 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

The playoff is expanding to 12 with six conference champions getting in automatically.  The PAC's place at the table is secure.  Further, they are absolutely going to get a TV deal right in line with the Big 12 in terms of $ per school.  There is no current scenario where it is advantageous for any remaining members to leave.  If the B1G expands then of course all bets are off but Washington and Oregon were both there to be had last summer and the B1G didn't make a move. 

Beyond the simple athletic advantages of moving to the PAC, SMU as a ton of California students and West Coast alumni.  Being associated academically with Stanford, Washington, CAL has real benefits too as opposed to Charlotte, FAU, UAB, ECU, et al.

The fact is SMU and SDSU make a ton of sense for the PAC and both have made the financial commitment to be competitive from the jump.

I think you're right but for some reason some people at ESPN disagree. They list the BIG 12, ACC, or PAC12 as being left out entirely of some playoffs. I think the BIG 12 is safe with TCU's recent run despite the loss to Georgia. The ACC is safe with Clemson and Florida State. Some down years but they've won 3 of the past 10 national championships. The outlier is the PAC 12. Yes, you're better off than the MWC and AAC but once the profile of USC leaves, that changes if nobody else makes some noise at the playoff level.