|
Post by SD Johnny on May 15, 2021 18:21:38 GMT -8
Except Oregon is tied to Oregon State and Washington State is tied to Washington and Kansas State is tied to Kansas. Everyone thinks that the so called "Top tier" of the P5 are going to break away but it's way more complicated than just separating. You have hundreds of years of relationships with sister schools in the same states. You think legislators in Kansas, Oregon and Washington are just going to let schools leave their fellow State schools behind? No way. There are a ton of politics involved here. Also there would be an avalanche of lawsuits. It's not going to be easy for schools to separate. That's why I don't think it's going to happen. OTOH, both Texas A&M and Arkansas were tied to Texas, Nebraska to Oklahoma, West Virginia to Pittsburgh, etc. I hope you're right. I like your version better than mine, but money talks. Those schools changed conferences and their sister schools were still in good conferences. A break away would leave them for dead. It’s a lot more complicated than that. The 5 major conferences are also like five crime families in that they don’t always see eye to eye and have their own agendas. The 64 team thing was a talking point 10 years ago but most of the sports writers parroting that at the time have backed off of it.
|
|
|
Post by sdsu69 on May 15, 2021 21:07:52 GMT -8
There is a huge difference between the tie in of Oklahoma and Texas and Oklahoma State and any tie in to Arkansas or Nebraska. Oklahoma will not leave without Texas or Ok State. Kansas is a no starter terrible football and not any type of TV market. Kansas State has a bigger following in Kansas in football than the hapless Jayhawks.
|
|
|
Post by aztecsrule72001 on May 15, 2021 22:11:13 GMT -8
At the risk of throwing cold water onto this, I'd like to refer back to Zeigler's recent article on the pending chasm between the "haves" and the "have not" football schools. I can't find the article but I remember him saying that there would be a contraction of P5 schools as the big named schools look to break away from the NCAA. I thought I remember him specifically singling out schools like Oregon St and Washington St as examples of schools in a P5 conference that probably wouldn't be a part of the new structure. I'm not holding my breath for a Pac-12 invite, that's for sure. With that said, it's always nice to dream! I don't disagree that there might be a contraction of power schools but I think it'll be the B12 taking the brunt of it. Pac = West, SEC = South, ACC= East, Big10 = North/midwest, the Big12 is redundant. Assuming each conference goes to 16, ACC has 1 spot left, Big10 has 2, Pac has 4, and SEC has 2. So that's 9 spots. IMO the only competition for the west spots are Texas, Oklahoma schools, Kansas and maybe BYU (only if they get over the religious thing which isn't likely). The Pac does not need Boise St. SEC and Big10 will have first dibs so if either want those schools (I'd be shocked if neither scooped up Texas and Oklahoma) that limits the Pac's options quite a bit. So while I'm not extremely optimistic there is still an opening even in a contraction scenario.
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on May 16, 2021 5:56:30 GMT -8
I get that. However, the fan backlash might lead to lower-than-expected success. Fans will follow whatever thing their team plays in. Especially out west where the imagined Western Super Conference turns into maybe 10 current Pac 12 schools & 6 other geographical outliers. I would think any contraction in the Power conferences will be done to minimize the fallout. Besides--this is just an opinion of mine. I don't think anything happens for at least a few years, based on the current broadcast contracts the P5 conferences have with major networks. Aren't we all just spit-balling here? 😆
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on May 16, 2021 5:58:31 GMT -8
The Pac-12 is awakening to the fact the new business model doesn't care about conference academic requirements or other goofy, elitist garbage used in the past. It's all about $$$$$. The way conferences will be moving, 16 might be bare minimum to 'keep up with the Joneses.' Will the Big 12 schools take a paycut or will they get some BSU/MWC deal? Geographically it's stupid too. UNLV & SDSU as stated above but also CSU and yes, the Zoobs. I hate them but a westerm super conf without them makes no sense. Utah then has its hated rival as well as CU. I'm inclined to agree with you, but I do think someone will have to push hard to get USC and UCLA on board--since they view us as inconsequential poachers. I don't know the policy that guides adding schools. Is unanimity required? If so, either school could/would block us---in my opinion. Or push everybody else, but those 2 if it does not require a unanimous vote. They will never let their adopted kid brother into their game.
|
|
|
Post by 🥸 Hopeless Aztec on May 16, 2021 6:52:49 GMT -8
I just think there would be a plethora of lawsuits, loss of fans and interest would nose dive. It would literally be the same teams every week that most don’t care about. I already try not to watch anyone outside of the MGC. However. I sure can see Iowa State, Flo Rida, Mishitgan, or some other school every Saturday I don’t care about. Maybe teams like ours get the week day time slots and Saturday goes to the big boys. More coverage during the week and more potential eye balls. I don’t know but we need to crush it the next few years, show off our stadium and achieve R1 status.
|
|
|
Post by aztech on May 16, 2021 12:26:34 GMT -8
I just think there would be a plethora of lawsuits, loss of fans and interest would nose dive. It would literally be the same teams every week that most don’t care about. I already try not to watch anyone outside of the MGC. However. I sure can see Iowa State, Flo Rida, Mishitgan, or some other school every Saturday I don’t care about. Maybe teams like ours get the week day time slots and Saturday goes to the big boys. More coverage during the week and more potential eye balls. I don’t know but we need to crush it the next few years, show off our stadium and achieve R1 status. The UC system will never allow this to happen. After Santa Barbara State College snuck into the UC system they passed a charter that made certain that'll never happen again. So on similar lines as long as we're in the CSU system they won't ever award us R1 status. Somehow someway we need to get public opinion to force a change.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on May 16, 2021 13:12:13 GMT -8
I just think there would be a plethora of lawsuits, loss of fans and interest would nose dive. It would literally be the same teams every week that most don’t care about. I already try not to watch anyone outside of the MGC. However. I sure can see Iowa State, Flo Rida, Mishitgan, or some other school every Saturday I don’t care about. Maybe teams like ours get the week day time slots and Saturday goes to the big boys. More coverage during the week and more potential eye balls. I don’t know but we need to crush it the next few years, show off our stadium and achieve R1 status. The UC system will never allow this to happen. After Santa Barbara State College snuck into the UC system they passed a charter that made certain that'll never happen again. So on similar lines as long as we're in the CSU system they won't ever award us R1 status. Somehow someway we need to get public opinion to force a change. In this particular, R1 arena, the Bay Area, Sacramento, and LA have vastly more critical mass of influence and leverage to change that arrangement. And their self-interests will likely keep it that way.
|
|
|
Post by aztech on May 16, 2021 15:43:14 GMT -8
The University presidents are the ones who dictate expansion, and their mandate has always been requiring they be a Research 1 (tier 1) University. SDSU is a Research 2 University. Unless that changes, SDSU most likely is out of the consideration set. The only thing I could see changing that would be the school having a significant impact on media revenues, which the P12 doesn't see in SDSU right now. We've typically won the ratings war in SD, but USC, UCLA, etc. get pretty good ratings locally as well. UNLV, UNR, UNM & CSU are all Research 1 Universities, but not sure if any have the pull or allure to entice the P12 to act, especially since CU has the Denver market. Maybe UNLV. BSU will never be in their consideration set. Ever. The Big 12 is our best option, especially if 1 or 2 of their universities jump ship AND if the B12 adds a western division (4+ schools) to make it more viable for travel considerations. Boise State is Trump University-West. LOL
|
|
|
Post by fisher1fan on May 16, 2021 16:30:28 GMT -8
The University presidents are the ones who dictate expansion, and their mandate has always been requiring they be a Research 1 (tier 1) University. SDSU is a Research 2 University. Unless that changes, SDSU most likely is out of the consideration set. The only thing I could see changing that would be the school having a significant impact on media revenues, which the P12 doesn't see in SDSU right now. We've typically won the ratings war in SD, but USC, UCLA, etc. get pretty good ratings locally as well. UNLV, UNR, UNM & CSU are all Research 1 Universities, but not sure if any have the pull or allure to entice the P12 to act, especially since CU has the Denver market. Maybe UNLV. BSU will never be in their consideration set. Ever. The Big 12 is our best option, especially if 1 or 2 of their universities jump ship AND if the B12 adds a western division (4+ schools) to make it more viable for travel considerations. Boise State is Trump University-West. LOL thumbs down or dislikes buttons are often needed on this site.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on May 16, 2021 16:38:51 GMT -8
I agree, Boise St isn't nearly that bad.
Boise's academics are improving, but still aren't especially good, however.
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on May 16, 2021 16:39:48 GMT -8
I would think any contraction in the Power conferences will be done to minimize the fallout. Besides--this is just an opinion of mine. I don't think anything happens for at least a few years, based on the current broadcast contracts the P5 conferences have with major networks. Aren't we all just spit-balling here? 😆 Aren't 99.9% of all post spit-balling
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on May 16, 2021 17:14:22 GMT -8
I just think there would be a plethora of lawsuits, loss of fans and interest would nose dive. It would literally be the same teams every week that most don’t care about. I already try not to watch anyone outside of the MGC. However. I sure can see Iowa State, Flo Rida, Mishitgan, or some other school every Saturday I don’t care about. Maybe teams like ours get the week day time slots and Saturday goes to the big boys. More coverage during the week and more potential eye balls. I don’t know but we need to crush it the next few years, show off our stadium and achieve R1 status. Completely agree. People like college footvall for its makeup. If they want the nfl, they watch the mfl.
|
|
|
Post by aztech on May 17, 2021 10:22:18 GMT -8
I agree, Boise St isn't nearly that bad. Boise's academics are improving, but still aren't especially good, however. I only meant to say that's probably how the Pac views them.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on May 17, 2021 13:31:14 GMT -8
I agree, Boise St isn't nearly that bad. Boise's academics are improving, but still aren't especially good, however. I only meant to say that's probably how the Pac views them. I just don't want to confer the slightest figment of credibility to 'Trump U' via a comparison to the minimally-reputable academics at Boise...
|
|
|
Post by azson on May 17, 2021 13:51:40 GMT -8
I only meant to say that's probably how the Pac views them. I just don't want to confer the slightest figment of credibility to 'Trump U' via a comparison to the minimally-reputable academics at Boise... Agreed - unless BSU has been shuttered in disgrace due to the defrauding of students, it should not be used in any sort of comparison.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on May 17, 2021 14:12:06 GMT -8
The University presidents are the ones who dictate expansion, and their mandate has always been requiring they be a Research 1 (tier 1) University. SDSU is a Research 2 University. Unless that changes, SDSU most likely is out of the consideration set. The only thing I could see changing that would be the school having a significant impact on media revenues, which the P12 doesn't see in SDSU right now. We've typically won the ratings war in SD, but USC, UCLA, etc. get pretty good ratings locally as well. UNLV, UNR, UNM & CSU are all Research 1 Universities, but not sure if any have the pull or allure to entice the P12 to act, especially since CU has the Denver market. Maybe UNLV. BSU will never be in their consideration set. Ever. The Big 12 is our best option, especially if 1 or 2 of their universities jump ship AND if the B12 adds a western division (4+ schools) to make it more viable for travel considerations. Maybe they will be flexible on the research part. Academically, SDSU would fit in with the conference. It’s a better school than Arizona State or Washington State. Maybe, but doubtful. I had a friend on their last expansion committee who told me about the conversations involved and research grants and partnerships and shared resources that come with it played a key role. And don't undervalue the financial impact of those partnerships. Times change, but as long as the President's dictate membership it's my guess that'll remain an important factor.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on May 17, 2021 14:26:18 GMT -8
Never is a very long time - or as the phrase goes never say never
also money Talks a very strong game for all involved
TV networks will surely be involved or give strong suggestions on what they prefer to happen . Just adding games is not what the Networks want so having games with the bottom level schools does not get many viewers .
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on May 17, 2021 14:48:49 GMT -8
Maybe they will be flexible on the research part. Academically, SDSU would fit in with the conference. It’s a better school than Arizona State or Washington State. Maybe, but doubtful. I had a friend on their last expansion committee who told me about the conversations involved and research grants and partnerships and shared resources that come with it played a key role. And don't undervalue the financial impact of those partnerships. Times change, but as long as the President's dictate membership it's my guess that'll remain an important factor. The question I have is, what would happen if SDSU was accepted into the Pac with the increased funding, visibility, notoriety, alumni involvement and everything that comes with inclusion? I think SDSU would easily fits in with the the bulk of the Pac school within 2-3 years. The new Stadium, campus expansion, New funding from the Stadium and increase enrollment dollars, I can almost guarantee you that Alumni involvement is going to take off. If you add in a Pac invite there is now a new solid player in the division and they are afraid of that happening.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on May 17, 2021 15:42:29 GMT -8
Maybe, but doubtful. I had a friend on their last expansion committee who told me about the conversations involved and research grants and partnerships and shared resources that come with it played a key role. And don't undervalue the financial impact of those partnerships. Times change, but as long as the President's dictate membership it's my guess that'll remain an important factor. The question I have is, what would happen if SDSU was accepted into the Pac with the increased funding, visibility, notoriety, alumni involvement and everything that comes with inclusion? I think SDSU would easily fits in with the the bulk of the Pac school within 2-3 years. The new Stadium, campus expansion, New funding from the Stadium and increase enrollment dollars, I can almost guarantee you that Alumni involvement is going to take off. If you add in a Pac invite there is now a new solid player in the division and they are afraid of that happening. Not sure what that has to do with my post (since you're quoting mine) since they're not related, but there's no doubt when the stage gets bigger people come crawling out of the woodwork. As for being competitive athletically within 2-3 years, sure, but we'll be starting well behind the curve. You not only reap the benefits, but you have to spend to compete & who you're competing against for talent is definitely much higher. Our basketball facilities are P12-worthy, and our new stadium will be great, but we'd need to improve our football facilities beyond the stadium to be competitive. Take a look at the football operation buildings around the conference & our practice facilities can't compete unfortunately. The other "risk" to joining a big conference is what happens if we struggle while stepping up in competition? Will donations, fan base support, etc., be consistent or better than when winning 9 games in a lesser conference when we're winning 4-6 games in a bigger, better conference? I would think so, just due to the improvement in the schedules but... As for being "afraid", I've never got that feeling. They value opportunity, so if a school brings something to the table that adds value while aligning with the ideals of the conference they're interested. Fear isn't part of the conversation based on anything & everything I've ever heard.
|
|