OT: PAC-2 About To Raid The Mountain West
- Thread starter bigmatt718
- Start date
Disagree all you want. Right now this isn’t eleven the best of what’s left conference. Why would AAC schools pay the penalty to leave to go to another G league that doesn’t even have a TV deal? At best the reconfigured PAC may be able to draw a couple of third tier Texas schools.
They're talking about a name brand (conference) but that will soon change. The CFP should not give them any dispensation after the first few years. By that point, when it's clear for all to see that it's a G5 league masquerading with a P5 name, they should be treated as such.
SMU might have an easier time breaking the GOR since they are forfeiting their payouts.
lol…funny here in San Antonio, utsa is probably the 4th most popular team behind A&M, Texas, OU and probably LSU (lots of swamp people here)
None of the programs you mentioned would give the present PAC even a side glance and the PAC's days as a Power Conference is over.
But grabbing UTSA and another Texas mid-major might help the new PAC get a better TV rights contract when Group (?) Conferences are compared .
Grabbing SMU would be a plus if they could get out of their ACC commitment
Seeing they gave up 9 years of ACC tv revenue, they might just feel by the time they start getting a piece of the pie the pie will be smaller because of teams like FSU and Clemson have left or receiving a larger amount than the rest of conference programs, leaving the Mustangs with far less of a share they thought they'd be getting when they joined the ACC
Last edited:
Oh when they announced the teams at first that was the report I read. It certainly may have changed
Yea but that tweet is about the precedent of what SMU paid the AAC when they left for the ACC.
They have billionaire oil money, so I’d give this idea some chance of happening.
Yea I posted a tweet with a quote from one of the Nevada/UNLV BOG (same BOG for both schools iirc) and that person said tha the two schools being joined at the hip was news to him.
Maybe both schools get added if there aren’t better options but they’re not joined at the hip.
They’ve already left and are in the ACC so I’m not sure what you’re referring to…if it’s leaving the ACC for the new PAC…I don’t expect that. No one is leaving a P4 (even the ACC/B12) for a G5(6).
P
The only scenario SMU leaves - even the is an extreme long-shot - is if the PAC-12 gets an auto playoff spot.
The only scenario SMU leaves - even the is an extreme long-shot - is if the PAC-12 gets an auto playoff spot.
Correct. But you know what they meant.
If the number of AQ bids was increased to top 6 conference champions.
Currently there are 5 AQ bids but it's generally agreed upon that SEC, Big 10, ACC and Big 12 conference champions will be taking 4 of those bids every year.
If it increases to 6 then the PAC-12 conference champion would likely believe they are assured of a AQ bid as well.
Thought going west might be too much when the money differential probably isn’t enough. AF coming east is probably too much for them as well, if they don’t have a home for other sports.
🤣
McMurphy reported Gonzaga was going to join the PAC but other reporters pushing back saying there have been discussions but nothing imminent.
🤣
McMurphy reported Gonzaga was going to join the PAC but other reporters pushing back saying there have been discussions but nothing imminent.
Last edited:
The news that UNLV and Nevada would be tied together by the state's board of regents was news ... to the state's board of regents. "Nobody talks about them as a package."
INLV and USU seem the most logical schools to add. UNLV may be required to change school name to Nevada State.
Never thought I’d see the day when UTSA, Tulane, and the others would turn down a “Power 5” conference.
Yea looks like but the MWC is trying to lock down its membership the way the AAC did.
If they can’t get those two, not sure where they will turn except the FCS I guess. Maybe the 2 Dakota schools.
Too much unknown right now. At the end of the day, it could be a lateral move for the AAC schools when you add in the extra travel.
Granted there won't be deadweight at the bottom so it will be a stronger conference than the AAC but does it justify the move? It's not a slam dunk.
No one considers the Pac12 a power conference now. It's why everything is P4 this year.
Merging with the MW under the PAC name seemed the best all around option for everyone.
I have a lot of thoughts on what a further weakened MWC would do, and less on the PAC-12’s choices now. If I had to guess, I’d go with the geographically logical MWC schools - UNLV, Nevada, San Jose State and USU.
As for the MWC, picking up some combo of the Idaho, Montana, Dakota schools seems logical. Maybe NMSU and UTEP. Possibly Sac State.
They want to get away from the bottom tier schools in the MWC.
Big keep for the MWC, they may stay together now…no UNLV for the PAC…maybe they don’t want to play second fiddle to AAC options. They didn’t get taken in the first go and maybe they should’ve been taken. I was surprised they weren’t.
No SJSU as well. Wonder if UNLV got a bonus like AF to stay. Not taking the LV school in round 1 looks like a mistake.
I’d go for the Dakota schools now if I’m the PAC..not sure what other reasonable options they have.
No SJSU as well. Wonder if UNLV got a bonus like AF to stay. Not taking the LV school in round 1 looks like a mistake.
I’d go for the Dakota schools now if I’m the PAC..not sure what other reasonable options they have.
Last edited:
