OT: PAC-2 About To Raid The Mountain West
- Thread starter bigmatt718
- Start date
I wonder if they got any sort of bonus to stay. AF got 10M. The MWC might use the exit fees of the schools leaving.
It’s the same way WSU/Or. St are using “legacy PAC funds” to attract schools and pay their exit fees out of the MWC.
Looks like they showed them the money lol.
The PAC gets Utah St. Maybe no bonus for them from the MWC like AF got and potentially UNLV got.
This move leaves both the MWC and PAC at 7 currently. You need 8 to be a recognized FBS conference.
Last edited:
The value is trying to improve SOS by getting rid of lower tier teams. The money will be somewhat better (eventually exit fees run out) and they’re trying to position themselves as the best of the rest so they have and inside track the G5 bid.
That’s part of why they tried to for the AAC schools to make itself distinctly as the best of the rest. It didn’t work so it’ll still probably be a fight for the best of the rest annually to get that G5 bid.
Utah State is joining the Pac-12. So they need one more member. I guess Nevada or Hawaii at this point? UNLV and AF declined.
Both the MWC and PAC need 1 more member after the USU news.
The multiphase approach was a mistake by the PAC. It gave the MWC a chance to regroup and use exit fees to entice some members to stay.
My opinion based on guesswork and nothing to support my guess
I believe when the PAC 2's scheduling deal with the MWC was arranged it wasn't renewed because WSU & OSU were trying to poach the best of the MWC ,and leave the others out.
Once the scheduling deal ended the PAC 2 went all out to get the better MWC members but they couldn't get enough to qualify to keep their status as a FBS confrence and looking to poach 2 members of the AAC if they can or find a way to make the FBS minimum of 8 elsewhere
The 4 MWC members that went PAC probably feel once the PAC reaches enough members to be a FBS Confrence , the TV rights deal will be better than what trhe MWC could have recived if they stayed.
Gambling the PAC name will make a difference in what the networks would be paying .
Even though UNLV is expected to stay in the MWC I wouldn't be surprised to find out they jumped to the PAC along with Utah St..
New Mexico might be a possibility because it's around #50 in tv market rankings and if the PAC needs a consolation prize the any port in storm approch might be used so the PAC gets enough members for FBS Confrence status
UConn gets to play Kingmaker
I actually think the PAC can get UNLV in the future and should save a spot for them.
The MWC tv contract runs out in 2026 and they don’t have a GOR but I assume they will institute one shortly. I wouldn’t expect it to be too long though. Say maybe early 2030s. Exit fee money to pay these bonuses to keep schools like AF and possibly UNLV will run out eventually.
So then you just have to look at the inherent value of the schools of each conference. The PAC is better for tv value. So in the long run that will win out. Then UNLV can jump ship when there’s no more exit fee money to dole out as a bonus.
I don't disagree with any of your above points, but the MWC and PAC have a limited amount of time (2 years? Maybe I made that up) to get to 8 teams. Someone has to blink before the TV contracts expire.
Well you mentioned UConn and here they are lol. Also yes you get two years grace period to regroup.
Won't be a p-5 , but might wind up the best ( or close to it) G rated conference and get a top G Conference TV rights deal and good bowl tie-ins
I think that's what OSU and WSU set out to do while trying to save the PAC and making the best of the bad situation they found themselves in
You know another reason it would’ve been better to get the MWC schools in one shot is that they could’ve dissolved the conference and not pay any exit fees.
They’ve got 5 schools jumping to the PAC now and going for UNLV could make 6 and SJSU was another target. If you took 7 in one shot, they could’ve just dissolved the conference with the 2/3 vote necessary and then joined the PAC without paying exit fees.
They’ve got 5 schools jumping to the PAC now and going for UNLV could make 6 and SJSU was another target. If you took 7 in one shot, they could’ve just dissolved the conference with the 2/3 vote necessary and then joined the PAC without paying exit fees.
That was inevitable…as was the implosion of the pac and the conversion of the b12 into a glorified CUSA
Who would've thought Utah State was the lynch pin to the MWC lol. Them not signing broke it up for the 7 others who did. Now UNLV back in play and AF to the AAC as well. I think Utah St made the right decision because if they didn't leave now they might not have a seat in the future if UNLV decided to leave say in the early 2030s or whatever when the exit fee bonuses could run out. There would likely be room for UNLV and the LV market in the future but couldn't say that for sure for USU if they didn't go now.
Also I thought as soon as you declare for another conference you lose your vote. But this article gives the impression if enough members leave then the conference could get dissolved and no exit fees would be paid. Might be incentive for the PAC to invite a couple others.
Also I thought as soon as you declare for another conference you lose your vote. But this article gives the impression if enough members leave then the conference could get dissolved and no exit fees would be paid. Might be incentive for the PAC to invite a couple others.
People make fun of these conferences but as I've said before, there's opportunity there now that wasn't there before. It goes for the G5 and the B12/ACC. They won't get as much money but they have better opportunities to accomplish good goals and raising their profiles. Really that's the point of money anyway, money is a means to an end, not the end itself. Like UConn in basketball isn't making the money of other schools but they achieved big goals. I can't see that kind of championship level achievement in football but making playoffs and getting some notoriety at schools that normally don't is certainly achievable.
For the PAC, trying to be the best of the rest is their goal. It's why they went after those AAC schools, in order to make it distinct. It didn't work so it will likely be a fight between the 2 most years.
Like I mentioned above no AQ6 is coming to help the PAC. This is just trying to be the best of the rest and get an inside track on the G5 slot.
For the PAC, trying to be the best of the rest is their goal. It's why they went after those AAC schools, in order to make it distinct. It didn't work so it will likely be a fight between the 2 most years.
Like I mentioned above no AQ6 is coming to help the PAC. This is just trying to be the best of the rest and get an inside track on the G5 slot.
Once upon a time, we paid what was at the time the stiffest penalty to leave the AAC: 15MM negotiated down to 11.5 MM. Nowadays, it's 25MM. Crazy stuff.
Looks like Tim Pernetti is working hard to raise private equity funds to stem cash flow issues within the AAC. Not exactly sure what those cash flow issues are, but the AAC was able to deflect overtures from the PAC aimed at 3 of its member schools.
Looks like Tim Pernetti is working hard to raise private equity funds to stem cash flow issues within the AAC. Not exactly sure what those cash flow issues are, but the AAC was able to deflect overtures from the PAC aimed at 3 of its member schools.
Even without a cash infusion from PE or whatever, I think it was a tall task to get them as I said above. The increased travel has to be balanced by a lot more money and imo the money difference won’t be enough to get over that hurdle.
The AAC gets high single digits per schools. The new PAC probably will get high single to maybe mid double on the high end. That’s not enough to sway them so they stayed.
Utah State has been better than Rutgers for the better part of the last decade+.
Watch out for that glass blowing back.
Damn. ..we lost to plenty of teams that didnt play in the B1G East. UT State would have been one of them.
| 1 | 2024 | MWC | 1 | 3 | 0 | .250 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -6.84 | 1.91 | Nate Dreiling (1-3) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2023 | MWC | 6 | 7 | 0 | .462 | 4 | 4 | 0 | .500 | -5.97 | -3.90 | Blake Anderson (6-7) | Famous Idaho Potato Bowl (L) | ||||||
| 3 | 2022 | MWC | 6 | 7 | 0 | .462 | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | -9.52 | -4.06 | Blake Anderson (6-7) | First Responder Bowl (L) | ||||||
| 4 | 2021 | MWC | 11 | 3 | 0 | .786 | 6 | 2 | 0 | .750 | 5.17 | -3.04 | 24 | 24 | Blake Anderson (11-3) | LA Bowl (W) | ||||
| 5 | 2020 | MWC | 1 | 5 | 0 | .167 | 1 | 5 | 0 | .167 | -19.38 | -2.55 | Gary Andersen (0-3), Frank Maile (1-2) | |||||||
| 6 | 2019 | MWC | 7 | 6 | 0 | .538 | 6 | 2 | 0 | .750 | -1.93 | -0.31 | Gary Andersen (7-6) | Frisco Bowl (L) | ||||||
| 7 | 2018 | MWC | 11 | 2 | 0 | .846 | 7 | 1 | 0 | .875 | 9.58 | -5.88 | 14 | 22 | 21 | Matt Wells (10-2), Frank Maile (1-0) | New Mexico Bowl (W) | |||
| 8 | 2017 | MWC | 6 | 7 | 0 | .462 | 4 | 4 | 0 | .500 | -2.18 | -3.72 | Matt Wells (6-7) | Arizona Bowl (L) | ||||||
| 9 | 2016 | MWC | 3 | 9 | 0 | .250 | 1 | 7 | 0 | .125 | -5.99 | 0.10 | Matt Wells (3-9) | |||||||
| 10 | 2015 | MWC | 6 | 7 | 0 | .462 | 5 | 3 | 0 | .625 | -1.23 | -1.92 | Matt Wells (6-7) | Famous Idaho Potato Bowl (L) | ||||||
| 11 | 2014 | MWC | 10 | 4 | 0 | .714 | 6 | 2 | 0 | .750 | 3.63 | -3.59 | Matt Wells (10-4) | New Mexico Bowl (W) | ||||||
| 12 | 2013 | MWC | 9 | 5 | 0 | .643 | 7 | 1 | 0 | .875 | 6.70 | -2.02 | Matt Wells (9-5) | Poinsettia Bowl (W) | ||||||
| 13 | 2012 | WAC | 11 | 2 | 0 | .846 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1.000 | 10.71 | -4.68 | 16 | 16 | Gary Andersen (11-2) | Famous Idaho Potato Bowl (W) | ||||
| 14 | 2011 | WAC | 7 | 6 | 0 | .538 | 5 | 2 | 0 | .714 | -2.22 | -5.14 | Gary Andersen (7-6) | Famous Idaho Potato Bowl (L) | ||||||
| 15 | 2010 | WAC | 4 | 8 | 0 | .333 | 2 | 6 | 0 | .250 | -7.64 | 0.70 | Gary Andersen (4-8) | |||||||
| 16 | 2009 | WAC | 4 | 8 | 0 | .333 | 3 | 5 | 0 | .375 | -6.85 | -2.35 | Gary Andersen (4-8) | |||||||
| 17 | 2008 | WAC | 3 | 9 | 0 | .250 | 3 | 5 | 0 | .375 | -9.20 | -0.95 | Brent Guy (3-9) | |||||||
| 18 | 2007 | WAC | 2 | 10 | 0 | .167 | 2 | 6 | 0 | .250 | -11.29 | -2.12 | Brent Guy (2-10) | |||||||
| 19 | 2006 | WAC | 1 | 11 | 0 | .083 | 1 | 7 | 0 | .125 | -16.52 | 1.73 | Brent Guy (1-11) | |||||||
| 20 | 2005 | WAC | 3 | 8 | 0 | .273 | 2 | 6 | 0 | .250 | -17.68 | -5.87 |
What decade I’m not sure, but from 2014-2024, I wouldn’t exactly call them juggernauts. KWhitthingham’s program, no doubt. State? Not so much. They made a habit of getting blown out by every P5 program they played (Wake Forest being one of the few exceptions) and beat who they had to beat in the MW to have a respectable schedule. Even against the esteemed Chris Ash, coach extraordinaire, I suspect they would’ve had trouble getting away with a W most years.
I doubt it. Folks forget how bad we actually were under Ash. His OOC record was awful. His only two G5 wins were Texas State (they had one win that year) and New Mexico (also a bad team and we barely won. Buffalo blew us out and he lost to Eastern Michigan. So overall he was 2-2. He was fired before the Liberty game that we won.
Utah State has been better than Rutgers for the better part of the last decade+.
Having a slightly better football record over the last 10 years while playing a vastly inferior schedule does nothing to prove your point.
I am certain that our sports programs would smoke Utah State head to head, across the board, but especially in football.
Having a slightly better football record over the last 10 years while playing a vastly inferior schedule does nothing to prove your point.
