4 teams from AAC agree to leave?

[NT80]

45 minutes ago, VideoEagle said:

Do they really or is I just internet rumor. Stanford did really want in the ACC. Yes, there are private schools in the ACC, but all of them have much higher profiles and fan basses than SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa. 
 

Does Stanford really want them or are they just willing to accept them until Stanford can get  in the group they really want?

Stanford only wants what Stanford wants.  They might drag Cal with them because of rivalry but they don’t care what happens to Ore St and Wash St.  

Stanford is holding out for a BIG10 invite, but an ACC invite would be next best. They have not lowered themselves yet to consider MWC or AAC. 

[El Paso Eagle]

 

 

[NT80]

52 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

 

 

Yes the Oregon State AD says that, but I have yet to hear the Stanford AD say he wants the Pac4 to stay together.

[wardly]

17 hours ago, NT80 said:

Yes the Oregon State AD says that, but I have yet to hear the Stanford AD say he wants the Pac4 to stay together.

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.

[keith]

1 hour ago, wardly said:

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.

I don't think those 3 can apply nearly enough pressure to force Stanford to stay and rebuild, but you may be right.  I think more pressure is being applied within the Stanford family to get out and if they can't, go independent until the next opportunity presents itself.  Of the 4, Stanford is the only one with the money and brand to do that.  The sooner those 3 accept the fact that Stanford is gone, the sooner those 3 can move on.

[outoftown]

2 hours ago, wardly said:

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.

Not sure that would be a smart move. Feels to me like overplaying his hand. If Stanford does not want to come, the AAC should still take the remaining teams. Otherwise it runs the risk of getting overtaken by the MWC. Since he should be worried that the CFP will reduce to 5 conference winner bids, getting overtaken by the MWC would be very serious problem.

[Wag Tag]

Do we really think Stanford is going to play UTSA, u of Tulsa or even our own UNT?  This would destroy their brand. They get in the ACC or go independent. Does FSU or Clemson really want to play SMU? You can put money in the conference but what does it do to the other schools brands? 

[wardly]

1 hour ago, Wag Tag said:

Do we really think Stanford is going to play UTSA, u of Tulsa or even our own UNT?  This would destroy their brand. They get in the ACC or go independent. Does FSU or Clemson really want to play SMU? You can put money in the conference but what does it do to the other schools brands? 

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.

[GrayEagle]

39 minutes ago, wardly said:

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.

I don't know that we'll know the final teams in the final mix until Oliver Luck (Stanford) and Mike Aresco reach an agreement.  So whoever Mike worked out the agreement with it did not hold (or at least hasn't yet).  I think that Luck is trying to get more money for the four former Pac 12 teams) or maybe just Stanford and Cal).  We won't know until Jared tells us the final score.  I, for one, don't want to go to another conference and would prefer not to go west.  I'm guessing that Cal, Oregon State and Washington State have agreed to go along with Stanford.  Maybe that's good because I understand SMU wants to go west and South Florida does also.  Of course, this can't possibly be done before the '24 season and likely not until '25.

[wardly]

Unless there has been a change since yesterday, Luck represents only OSU and WSU. I personally think Stanford will go independent rather than join the American Athletic Conference but OSU and WSU will sigh up. I don't think anyone has a clue what Cal will do. As far as the timing, it needs too be soon enough so that the PAC 4 teams can create a 2024 schedule.

[UNTLifer]

Stanford is turning into the west coast version of smu.  Let them go independent and die on the vine.  They think playing us and other AAC schools will kill their brand?  The performance the past couple of years has done that.  They want smu, Rice, Tulsa and USF?  Take them.  We can backfill with Boise St., SDSU, Air Force and CO St which each draw more than those four combined.  So tired of this B.S.  Greed is killing college football.

[greenminer]

5 hours ago, Wag Tag said:

Do we really think Stanford is going to play UTSA, u of Tulsa or even our own UNT?  This would destroy their brand. They get in the ACC or go independent. Does FSU or Clemson really want to play SMU? You can put money in the conference but what does it do to the other schools brands? 

Stanford's brand will die.

They have an incredible brand - but a lot of it is based on their academia.  What we are seeing, as this becomes a story of B10/SEC vs. the rest of us, is that money/viewership is the driving factor here...not academia.

Sorry Stanford, you're probably not getting into the B10, and thus...your brand will die.  They will have to make some hard choices here and, honestly, it probably won't be fun to watch (unless you hate them).

Edited August 18, 2023 by greenminer

[eagle73]

I do not hate them yet, but I am learning.

[NT80]

6 hours ago, wardly said:

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.

I agree Stanford would really like to be in the Big10, or Indy like Notre Dame, but worries about their non-football sports if they go Indy.  Stanford will not hold pat and help Oregon St and Wash St rebuild the PAC with only move-ups available they don't deem worthy.

[greenminer]

30 minutes ago, NT80 said:

I agree Stanford would really like to be in the Big10, or Indy like Notre Dame, but worries about their non-football sports if they go Indy.  Stanford will not hold pat and help Oregon St and Wash St rebuild the PAC with only move-ups available they don't deem worthy.

I've always been of the impression that ND's TV deal is what lets them do Indie.

I can't imagine UMASS surviving Indie as long as they want.  Same with UCONN.  Army, not sure how they do it.

Point being, Stanford shouldn't take that risk.

[Green Otaku]

4 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

Stanford is turning into the west coast version of smu.  Let them go independent and die on the vine.  They think playing us and other AAC schools will kill their brand?  The performance the past couple of years has done that.  They want smu, Rice, Tulsa and USF?  Take them.  We can backfill with Boise St., SDSU, Air Force and CO St which each draw more than those four combined.  So tired of this B.S.  Greed is killing college football.

Let's flip the scenario. The AAC gets raided and all that's left are UNT, UTSA, Charlotte, and Tulsa. The options are merge with CUSA, or go indy in FB and put Olympic sports in the Southland Conference. Unless the AD can figure something else out. How are you feeling now? 

[NT80]

51 minutes ago, Green Otaku said:

Let's flip the scenario. The AAC gets raided and all that's left are UNT, UTSA, Charlotte, and Tulsa. The options are merge with CUSA, or go indy in FB and put Olympic sports in the Southland Conference. Unless the AD can figure something else out. How are you feeling now? 

If we're like Stanford and $32B in the bank I'm ok going Indy for 10 years, but I'm not dropping down.  If I'm Washington State and already $10M in debt in the Athletic Dept I'm calling the MWC.  I'll look for an upgrade during the next media rights cycle.

[UNTLifer]

1 hour ago, Green Otaku said:

Let's flip the scenario. The AAC gets raided and all that's left are UNT, UTSA, Charlotte, and Tulsa. The options are merge with CUSA, or go indy in FB and put Olympic sports in the Southland Conference. Unless the AD can figure something else out. How are you feeling now? 

What @NT80 said

[Green Otaku]

52 minutes ago, NT80 said:

If we're like Stanford and $32B in the bank I'm ok going Indy for 10 years, but I'm not dropping down.  If I'm Washington State and already $10M in debt in the Athletic Dept I'm calling the MWC.  I'll look for an upgrade during the next media rights cycle.

 

28 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

What @NT80 said

Calling the MWC is akin to Stanford calling the ACC. Yet people on here are bashing them for it. So again the ACC says no, meaning the same thing for us the MWC says no. So you'd be ok with being in CUSA? 

[NT80]

13 hours ago, Green Otaku said:

 

Calling the MWC is akin to Stanford calling the ACC. Yet people on here are bashing them for it. So again the ACC says no, meaning the same thing for us the MWC says no. So you'd be ok with being in CUSA? 

Washington State is coming from a position of strength to the MWC (P5>G5), they won't say no to them.  Stanford to the ACC is equal (P5) but Stanford is an elite academic school.  UNT to MWC is equal (G5=G5) but depends on if they want our market or not. 

If UNT is not offered by the MWC then it would depend on what opponents/schedule we deem next best CUSA/SBC?  Hopefully It's only for a short term until the ACC implodes and expansion lotto happens again.

[greenminer]

I would "go back" to the Belt before I'd go back to CUSA and Judy.  Come on people!

[Green Otaku]

1 hour ago, NT80 said:

Washington State is coming from a position of strength to the MWC (P5>G5), they won't say no to them.  Stanford to the ACC is equal (P5) but Stanford is an elite academic school.  UNT to MWC is equal (G5=G5) but depends on if they want our market or not. 

If UNT is not offered by the MWC then it would depend on what opponents/schedule we deem next best CUSA/SBC?  Hopefully It's only for a short term until the ACC implodes and expansion lotto happens again.

You nor @UNTLifer have answered the question, you just keep skirting it. Going indy/olympics in southland, or joining CUSA. Would you be happy with either of those two options for UNT? 

[UNTLifer]

18 minutes ago, Green Otaku said:

You nor @UNTLifer have answered the question, you just keep skirting it. Going indy/olympics in southland, or joining CUSA. Would you be happy with either of those two options for UNT? 

Here’s my answer. No, I wouldn’t be happy, but you are playing hypotheticals.  Stanford is in the position of having to make a decision on their future, we are not. 

[Green Otaku]

18 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

Here’s my answer. No, I wouldn’t be happy, but you are playing hypotheticals.  Stanford is in the position of having to make a decision on their future, we are not. 

I commend you for actually answering the question. 

People are running with the narrative that Stanford is snobby, elitist, too good for us, etc., but we would be doing the exact same thing, trying to position UNT in the best conference/situation possible. It just comes off as hypocritical and lacking self-awareness. Why wouldn't they look for the best possible outcome? 

[greenminer]

1 hour ago, Green Otaku said:

I commend you for actually answering the question. 

People are running with the narrative that Stanford is snobby, elitist, too good for us, etc., but we would be doing the exact same thing, trying to position UNT in the best conference/situation possible. It just comes off as hypocritical and lacking self-awareness. Why wouldn't they look for the best possible outcome? 

They are literally holding up the entire process because they refuse to accept "no" votes from B10/ACC.  I think this is more than just them "positioning themselves" the best they can.