PAC is back

[DentonStang]

UNT possibly headed west?

https://x.com/RossDellenger/status/1834204561562624058?t=mRSH8CKhXRTOUsfwCNQkww&s=19

[NT80]

$18 million exit fee to MWC for each school, which this ESPN article says the PAC2 could/would help with. 

This is what many expected OSU and WSU to do….cherry pick schools from the MWC to re-form their own Conference.

They need 8 total to be a viable Conference again.  The other invites will be very interesting.  Would we, should we? 

The MWC would still have 8 members, and thus be a viable conference, if they don’t get poached any additional schools. 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/41226997/sources-boise-state-four-schools-set-join-pac-12

[golfingomez]

21 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

UNT possibly headed west?

https://x.com/RossDellenger/status/1834204561562624058?t=mRSH8CKhXRTOUsfwCNQkww&s=19

Wow. This is a twist

[C Rod]

We’ve got to beat Tech this weekend. 

[NT80]

7 minutes ago, C Rod said:

 

AAC needs to invite Air Force to join Army and Navy!

[golfingomez]

Remaining MWC schools, in the event that the American wants to grab some

-Air Force (consolidate all military academies?, sounds pretty GD American to me)

-Nevada

-UNLV

-New Mexico

-San Jose State

-Utah State

-Wyoming

-Hawaii (football only)

If I were the commissioner, i would take long looks at AFA, UNLV, Utah St. and Wyoming. I'm not saying we should definitely go after these school, i just think we should investigate the possibility

 

[TheColonyEagle]

Feels like this is going to be moot in a few years. This new PAC conference will be left out anyway when the top schools break away….

also….(and I know I shouldn’t use logic) 

wouldn’t it make sense to have Cal and Stanford come back? 

[C Rod]

11 minutes ago, NT80 said:

AAC needs to invite Air Force to join Army and Navy!

I agree 100%. However I don't see the American making any moves until the Pac 12 is done poaching teams. I'm sure Memphis will get the next invite. Then who's next? ... UTSA? 🤮 

[Matt from A700]

7 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

wouldn’t it make sense to have Cal and Stanford come back? 

If the ACC blows up and the best teams left are BC, Wake Forest, Syracuse, SMU... then yeah I definitely would think Cal and Stanford would seriously consider going #BacktothePAC.

[C Rod]

8 minutes ago, TheColonyEagle said:

wouldn’t it make sense to have Cal and Stanford come back? 

It would definitely makes sense but unfortunately common sense left college football years ago. If Clemson and FSU can't break free of the ACC's Grant of Rights, there's no way Cal and Stanford can afford to break back to the Pac. They are stuck.  

[NT80]

1 minute ago, C Rod said:

I agree 100%. However I don't see the American making any moves until the Pac 12 is done poaching teams. I'm sure Memphis will get the next invite. Then who's next? ... UTSA? 🤮 

Good point. 
 

Memphis has been mentioned, but seems so far away.   I’m sure the PAC2 will consult a potential media suitor to see what brand/value is best for remaining invites.  

Memphis, Tulane, UTSA, UNT as a group?? 
 

[Matt from A700]

I would believe Memphis is holding out for the ACC. The Pac6 right now doesn't do anything positive for them, especially without a known media rights deal.

[C Rod]

21 minutes ago, NT80 said:

Memphis, Tulane, UTSA, UNT as a group??

Where do I sign? This makes a lot of sense. Memphis is a brand, Tulane an AAU school, and UNT & UTSA establish a strong foothold in major Texas markets with a growing rivalry. 

If there was ever a season for us to get hot and put together a winning streak, this is it. We have to seize the moment.

[RBP79]

Not for a UNT invite to PAC2...but you gotta look at the TV/recruiting area. DFW would be a nice grab for the New PAC8.

[NT80]

From the updated ESPN article…

“The six members will collaborate to decide which schools to target for further expansion, as the conference still needs to add two more schools to reach the NCAA minimum requirement. The conference is in the first year of a two-year grace period afforded by NCAA bylaws to exist below the minimum in the case of departures.

It is unclear how many schools the new-look conference expects to have by 2026.”

[Mean Green 93-98]

40 minutes ago, C Rod said:

It would definitely makes sense but unfortunately common sense left college football years ago. If Clemson and FSU can't break free of the ACC's Grant of Rights, there's no way Cal and Stanford can afford to break back to the Pac. They are stuck.  

For now.  If the PAC know Cal and Stanford are coming back, and if Cal and Stanford know they'll have an invitation, they can all afford to wait it out.

And I would think SMU would try to sneak in with them.

[meanJewGreen]

4 minutes ago, NT80 said:

From the updated ESPN article…

“The six members will collaborate to decide which schools to target for further expansion, as the conference still needs to add two more schools to reach the NCAA minimum requirement. The conference is in the first year of a two-year grace period afforded by NCAA bylaws to exist below the minimum in the case of departures.

It is unclear how many schools the new-look conference expects to have by 2026.”

We better hope Jared has some good relationships...

[C Rod]

3 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

For now.  If the PAC know Cal and Stanford are coming back, and if Cal and Stanford know they'll have an invitation, they can all afford to wait it out.

And I would think SMU would try to sneak in with them.

Yes, they are stuck for now... 

I'm curious if the PAC would even welcome Cal and Stanford back? The PAC was left for dead and Oregon State and Wash State were humiliated by their peers. Bridges were burned on the way out.

Now if USC and UCLA wanted back in, the PAC would get over their feelings fast. But Stanford and Cal... I'm not so sure.

[Mean Green 93-98]

14 minutes ago, C Rod said:

Yes, they are stuck for now... 

I'm curious if the PAC would even welcome Cal and Stanford back? The PAC was left for dead and Oregon State and Wash State were humiliated by their peers. Bridges were burned on the way out.

Now if USC and UCLA wanted back in, the PAC would get over their feelings fast. But Stanford and Cal... I'm not so sure.

The same thought occurred to me after I posted my previous post.  It's probably better for all concerned to be together in the PAC, but it would be hard to blame the PAC for cutting off their nose to spite their face on that one.

[MeanGreenGlory]

While many on this board laugh at SMU for giving up revenue to join the ACC, they're playing the long game and I think it'll work out well for them in the end. I don't think they'll end up in their dream scenario, but I do think the move to the ACC—however short or long that ends up being—will pay dividends.

A similar notion would be true for UNT, and this potential (and highly skeptical) move to the PAC. 

Hear me out...

I think it's inevitable that the SEC and BIG10 will eventually do one more round of expansion, partner, and become the equivalent of the "pro college league." That league will be the #1 dog, no questions asked.

After that, it'll be a mad scramble for all the other Division 1 schools and conferences to figure out what to make of themselves. Additional realignment and consolidation will happen at that time.

The conferences involved in the mad scramble will be the ACC, BIG12, American, PAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt, MAC, and Conference USA. 

And just as conference realignment has worked thus far, you want to be as high up the pecking order as possible to get the next call "up."

If there's a high likelihood that the reformed PAC will successfully establish itself as being better than the American and Mountain West (and I think they'll do that if they select the best of the MWC and great media markets from the American), then UNT should strive to get an invite and make it happen. It may be a 2-year home or a 10-year home, but at some point, additional shifts will happen, and the higher up we are in the pecking order, the better. 

Personally, I think the American group that @NT80 suggested is spot on and would make it a compelling conference:

WEST

• Washington State
• Oregon State
• Boise State
• San Diego State
• Fresno

EAST

• Colorado State
• North Texas
• UTSA
• Memphis
• Tulane

There's much less fluff in this conference, reasonable travel within the regional pods, some solid media markets, and competitive football and basketball. 

 

Go Mean Green!

Edited September 12, 2024 by MeanGreenGlory

[Coffee and TV]

4 minutes ago, MeanGreenGlory said:

While many on this board laugh at SMU for giving up revenue to join the ACC, they're playing the long game and I think it'll work out well for them in the end. I don't think they'll end up in their dream scenario, but I do think the move to the ACC—however short or long that ends up being—will pay dividends.

A similar notion would be true for UNT, and this potential (and highly skeptical) move to the PAC. 

Hear me out...

I think it's inevitable that the SEC and BIG10 will eventually do one more round of expansion, partner, and become the equivalent of the "pro college league." That league will be the #1 dog, no questions asked.

After that, it'll be a mad scramble for all the other Division 1 schools and conferences to figure out what to make of themselves. Additional realignment and consolidation will happen at that time.

The conferences involved in the mad scramble will be the ACC, BIG12, American, PAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt, MAC, and Conference USA. 

And just as conference realignment has worked thus far, you want to be as high up the pecking order as possible to get the next call "up."

If there's a high likelihood that the reformed PAC will successfully establish itself as being better than the American and Mountain West (and I think they'll do that if they select the best of the MWC and great media markets from the American), then UNT should strive to get an invite and make it happen. It may be a 2-year home or a 10-year home, but at some point, additional shifts will happen, and the higher up we are in the pecking order, the better. 

Personally, I think the American group that @NT80 suggested is spot on and would make it a compelling conference:

EAST

• Washington State
• Oregon State
• Boise State
• San Diego State
• Fresno

WEST

• Colorado State
• North Texas
• UTSA
• Memphis
• Tulane

There's much less fluff in this conference, reasonable travel within the regional pods, some solid media markets, and competitive football and basketball. 

 

Go Mean Green!

You need 12 to have divisions I think. 

[Coffee and TV]

1 hour ago, TheColonyEagle said:

Feels like this is going to be moot in a few years. This new PAC conference will be left out anyway when the top schools break away….

also….(and I know I shouldn’t use logic) 

wouldn’t it make sense to have Cal and Stanford come back? 

Cal and Stanford will 100% not play with the Colorado States and Boise States of the world. Their academic brands are way too elite for those schools, which is why they went all the way to the ACC and not the Big 12 when they had the chance. 

[Mean Green 93-98]

3 minutes ago, Coffee and TV said:

Cal and Stanford will 100% not play with the Colorado States and Boise States of the world. Their academic brands are way too elite for those schools

Everyone said the same thing about UT and the SEC not that long ago.

Money talks.

[CMJ]

3 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

Everyone said the same thing about UT and the SEC not that long ago.

Money talks.

I thought UT just didn't want to lose their network and that was the major holdup.  California and Stanford really do look down their noses at what they consider academically inferior schools like Boise State.  As much as it'd make sense for them to come back to the Pac-? - I'm not sure they would.

[NT80]

18 minutes ago, Coffee and TV said:

You need 12 to have divisions I think. 

You could have informal divisions or pods for scheduling purposes within a conference. 
 

“Any conference may split its teams into two divisions; however, as of the 2024 season, the only FBS conference that uses divisions is the SBC.”