TX State to the PAC 2?

Green Otaku · Wednesday at 04:54 PM

1 minute ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Most of that is true and some of that is speculation. But what is for sure is that if they don't get to the minimum required schools then it all dries up. So, better spend some to have some. Or spend none and lose it all.

That's why TxSt is such an easy choice for them, especially if the media deal turns out to be disappointing. $5M to leave the SBC, which TxSt will have no problem paying, gets them into TX, gets them into the central time zone, and most importantly buys them time.

greenminer · Wednesday at 05:45 PM

Is there some reason this deal is not already done? PAC doesn't seem like it's in a position with all the leverage...they need someone to join them and complete the membership.

Maybe there are others lobbying behind closed doors?

MeanGreen22 · Wednesday at 06:06 PM

19 minutes ago, greenminer said:

Is there some reason this deal is not already done? PAC doesn't seem like it's in a position with all the leverage...they need someone to join them and complete the membership.

Maybe there are others lobbying behind closed doors?

If they truly wanted Texas State, it would be announced by now. Seems pretty plain that they are the back up to the back up plan. Unfortunately for the Pac, that plan is the most likely at this point in time.

UNTLifer · Wednesday at 06:22 PM

On 1/22/2025 at 10:28 AM, NorthTexasWeLove said:

It's been noted literally a few posts above yours that the PAC has 1/4 billion dollars to help alleviate financial difficulties. Not sure if they're willing to spend that money to get there, but they only have so long to reach their number of mandated full-time/football only athletics members.

Again, if there is any option to get there then we have to do what we can in order to get there. Memphis and Tulane collaborated together to turn down their offer. There is a reason for that. They believe the grass is greener on the other side for THEM. And they very well may be right. Who is to say we get an invite to their pasture? I am likened to believe we do not. So, we have to do what is best for US. And frankly, that's getting out of a conference that is going to be SBUSA in only a matter of time.

And when the PAC drains those funds assisting schools it wants for its conference, what happens moving forward? They don't have a media deal, there doesn't appear to be one on the horizon and considering they could not get a deal with the likes of OR, USC, UCLA, etc in the conference, what makes anybody think they are more attractive now?

Edited 3 hours ago by UNTLifer

NorthTexasWeLove · Wednesday at 06:57 PM

29 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

And when the PAC drains those funds assisting schools it wants for it's conference, what happens moving forward? They don't have a media deal, there doesn't appear to be one on the horizon and considering they could get a deal with the likes of OR, USC, UCLA, etc in the conference, what makes anybody think they are more attractive now?

I don't know man. If if's and but's were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas. What do you want me to tell you? I know that without Tulane, Memphis, and ECU (the schools the ACC will inevitably come poach to start) we will be in the SBUSA. Full stop. We can sit on our hands and hope that it doesn't happen. Or be proactive. I can promise you this, those named schools above (and probably a couple others) will be gone by the expiration of the current AAC media deal. Also, I have seen you mention the lack of PAC media deal at least 2 or 3 times. Do you really think they won't get a deal? Do you really think it won't be better than the current AAC deal? Also, do you think the future AAC deal will be better than what we currently have? Think about those questions. You are referencing every thing and thought with the current what is without even really thinking about what a decade from now, 2035 will look like for us.

RBP79 · 2025-01-23T17:32:30Z

Unless the PAC (whatever) keeps it's 'P' (Power) designation it doesn't move the needle for me to leave the AAC. And that doesn't seem to be in the conversation.

UNTLifer · 2025-01-23T18:18:57Z

23 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Also, I have seen you mention the lack of PAC media deal at least 2 or 3 times. Do you really think they won't get a deal? Do you really think it won't be better than the current AAC deal? Also, do you think the future AAC deal will be better than what we currently have? Think about those questions.

Did the PAC get a good media deal with UCLA, USC, WA, OR, AZ and AZ St. still in the conference? Nope, that's why half headed to the Big10 and have to the Big XII.

Second question, if we continue to build the conference, then yes, I think we could get a better deal.

TXSTFB_Fan · 2025-01-23T18:45:59Z

On 1/20/2025 at 10:05 PM, NT80 said:

The PAC2 has $240 million reasons to help us with exit fees if we are a member they need!

They don't, since about $150m of that is owed to the Mountain West. The PAC is trying to sue to get out from under that obligation. The outlook of that case doesn't look favorable for the PAC, and will it happen before their July 2026 deadline? Adding another $27m for each additional AAC team would drain the $255m (figure I read) even further. A poster mentioned earlier, TXST is in the right place at the right time with the right leadership and trending upward. TXST is a good buy for a $5m exit fee. Will the PAC make the purchase? I have no idea.

Edited 14 hours ago by TXSTFB_Fan

GMG_Dallas · 2025-01-23T23:21:03Z

On 1/22/2025 at 12:22 PM, UNTLifer said:

And when the PAC drains those funds assisting schools it wants for it's conference, what happens moving forward? They don't have a media deal, there doesn't appear to be one on the horizon and considering they could get a deal with the likes of OR, USC, UCLA, etc in the conference, what makes anybody think they are more attractive now?

They COULD get a deal with all those schools you mentioned, it just wasn't a BIG10/SEC type deal. The premiere PAC programs went to the BIG10 to get what they were worth, the next level went to the BIG12 to get what they were worth, and then the other 4 got crumbs. It's believed on other forums the PAC-2's media deal with CW for 2024 was worth $25 million so $12.5 each. You don't actually believe the PAC couldn't get any deal with their previous membership, do you?

GMG_Dallas · 2025-01-23T23:25:05Z

5 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

Did the PAC get a good media deal with UCLA, USC, WA, OR, AZ and AZ St. still in the conference? Nope, that's why half headed to the Big10 and have to the Big XII.

Second question, if we continue to build the conference, then yes, I think we could get a better deal.

What's your solution if Memphis and Tulane leave in a couple years and our next deal is CUSA level?

NorthTexasWeLove · 2025-01-24T00:27:40Z

5 hours ago, UNTLifer said:

Did the PAC get a good media deal with UCLA, USC, WA, OR, AZ and AZ St. still in the conference? Nope, that's why half headed to the Big10 and have to the Big XII.

Second question, if we continue to build the conference, then yes, I think we could get a better deal.

Good is relative. Good compared to the Big10 and SEC. Well, no. So, we saw what happened. The schools that dictate a BIG10/SEC media deal (eyeballs, market, whatever) took their ball and and went somewhere they were going to be paid their market value. The second tier PAC schools were gobbled up by the Big12 and the historical losers limped into the ACC. But just because the old PAC didn't get a SEC/Big10 type offer doesn't mean that a newly formed PAC will not surpass the current AAC deal of 7ishM. I promise you that the teams forming the current PAC will get north of that. I can also promise you that the AAC when negotiation time comes around will get less. The PAC is clearly positioning themselves to be the best non-P2(4) conference in the country and a very, very viable basketball league. I don't know what about this is even debatable. Also, and as previously stated, our brands (the teams that draw eyeballs when they are on TV) will be leaving the AAC before the AAC gets to the negotiating table in 2031ish. You speak of building like we're adding a br onto a single-family home and calling it a forever home. What brands are we going to attract? None. The dust has settled outside of the PAC trying to survive. The ACC will be the next hand to fall. No one is going to budge that believes they (Memphis & Tulane) will be going into a new formed ACC, similar to what the Big12 has done. They know they are going. It could happen as early as this summer. This is why they both said no thank you to the PAC. We need to go to the PAC or we will be in a conference with LaTech, ULM, Arkansas State, and probably Rice... as our regional teams.

Questions for you...

What makes you believe that a Tulane and Memphis-less conference is going to out negotiate the PAC with a baketball blueblood* and strong basketball and football programs everywhere you look?

Where are we building? Who is coming? What kind of resources are being dumped into their programs to truly elevate the AAC brand? What is the AAC doing to elevate beyond the fold as they were doing with their old big12 brands?

*I think we can call the Zags a blueblood nowadays, or no?

NorthTexasWeLove · 2025-01-24T00:29:40Z

1 hour ago, GMG_Dallas said:

They COULD get a deal with all those schools you mentioned, it just wasn't a BIG10/SEC type deal. The premiere PAC programs went to the BIG10 to get what they were worth, the next level went to the BIG12 to get what they were worth, and then the other 4 got crumbs. It's believed on other forums the PAC-2's media deal with CW for 2024 was worth $25 million so $12.5 each. You don't actually believe the PAC couldn't get any deal with their previous membership, do you?

They did have media offers? Lifer is acting like a bozo, intentional or not, not sure. Their offer was in the low 30's per school. The Oregons, USC's, Udubbs, etc. etc. scoffed at it when they looked across the country and saw the Big10 and SEC pulling fiddy.

NT80 · 2025-01-24T04:43:43Z

11 hours ago, RBP79 said:

Unless the PAC (whatever) keeps it's 'P' (Power) designation it doesn't move the needle for me to leave the AAC. And that doesn't seem to be in the conversation.

"Power" is subjective these days. It shouldn't be a Conference label like P4, but an individual Program label, like a Top 60 ranking. Especially since rosters can change radically now each year with NIL and Portal. Being last in the Big12 doesn't always make you better than the best G5 programs just because of your uniform patch. Right UH? (4-8).

NT80 · 2025-01-24T05:26:10Z

Pac-12 expansion candidates: North Texas Mean Green

https://www.si.com/college/boise-state/football/pac-12-expansion-candidates-north-texas-mean-green-01jj5kr2fsds

UNTLifer · 2025-01-24T05:53:38Z

5 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

They did have media offers? Lifer is acting like a bozo, intentional or not, not sure. Their offer was in the low 30's per school. The Oregons, USC's, Udubbs, etc. etc. scoffed at it when they looked across the country and saw the Big10 and SEC pulling fiddy.

A bozo? Why, because I posted the truth?