|
|
Post by panammaniac on Sept 17, 2021 5:30:47 GMT -8
If the P12 did expand, ZERO chance Boise gets an invite. There is no way the presidents would align themselves academically with Boise. Good point, problem is your forgetting they allowed Arizona State in. My Golden Retriever could get into ASU. ASU is a Tier 1 research institution. Boise is basically a glorified junior college that doesn’t even have PhD programs. That’s the difference. |
|
|
|
Post by longtimebooster on Sept 17, 2021 6:50:06 GMT -8
My Golden Retriever could get into ASU. My Australian shepherd was student of the month there. We are so proud. |
|
|
|
Post by PAC12 Aztec on Sept 17, 2021 7:00:08 GMT -8
My Golden Retriever could get into ASU. My Australian shepherd was student of the month there. We are so proud. Oh you guys.... my white lab is smarter than both of your dogs! 🙈 |
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Sept 17, 2021 8:38:35 GMT -8
Believe Conferences USE the education things when they want to politely say NO . For the most part Money / TV Markets is the driving force for expansion . This being a Big Money Decision think this easily sneaks its way into the Conversation - after a chat with the TV Networks .
|
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Sept 17, 2021 9:00:47 GMT -8
Good point, problem is your forgetting they allowed Arizona State in. My Golden Retriever could get into ASU. ASU is a Tier 1 research institution. Boise is basically a glorified junior college that doesn’t even have PhD programs. That’s the difference. But they do have a truck driving school!!! : ) |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Sept 17, 2021 9:06:50 GMT -8
If the P12 did expand, ZERO chance Boise gets an invite. There is no way the presidents would align themselves academically with Boise. Good point, problem is your forgetting they allowed Arizona State in. My Golden Retriever could get into ASU. ASU is one of the fastest growing Research Universities in the country, is known as one of the best if not the best in Innovation, and is a Tier 1 Research University, all aligning with the P12's goals. The only downside to ASU is their high acceptance rate, plus being known as a party school. But comparing them to Boise is like comparing middle school to high school. |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Sept 17, 2021 9:47:40 GMT -8
I don't agree that this is "obvious". This isn't going to happen for the next 4 years, and if Boise's football program fades at all they don't bring much else to the equation. Memphis isn't all that valuable either in the big scheme (basketball doesn't carry much weight), and would come down to how strongly they want to move out west (4 or 5 teams, including BYU)? If one is to believe media reports, Boise and Memphis are next on deck. Hocutt said the #1 thing in big 12 expansion was football success and following. Both Memphis and Boise have been to NY 6 bowl games. SDSU has not. Both have better tv ratings than SDSU. No where have I seen SDSU listed before Boise. This goes back to what I said previously that we should root against Boise every game and you thought we should root for them. I think that is ridiculously idiotic. Why in the hell would we root for a school we are competing against to advance to the next level when the gatekeeper has explicitly stated that football success is the #1 criterion. It’s just beyond comprehension to me. I always root for MWC in non-con because it strengthens our conference & provides for more higher quality wins when we face them. Football success is important, but being to a NY6 game isn't defining. Ask Western Michigan. We have a successful football program, despite what some of our fans believe, and when you compare comparable games (i.e. CBSSN games at similar times) our ratings are every bit as good as Boise's. We bring a much larger market and the potential for a significantly greater overall following (larger alumni base; more local). I haven't seen any creditable reports that the B12 will run with 14 vs. 16 teams in 2025, when this next phase of expansion happens. That wouldn't make sense. Adding 4, not 2 does. We would definitely be in the picture, with our without a NY6 bowl game on our resume. Like with any further B12 expansion, a commitment to moving west would be necessary, which goes for Boise as well. |
|
|
|
Post by panammaniac on Sept 17, 2021 13:28:49 GMT -8
Good point, problem is your forgetting they allowed Arizona State in. My Golden Retriever could get into ASU. ASU is one of the fastest growing Research Universities in the country, is known as one of the best if not the best in Innovation, and is a Tier 1 Research University, all aligning with the P12's goals. The only downside to ASU is their high acceptance rate, plus being known as a party school. But comparing them to Boise is like comparing middle school to high school. A friend of mine who went to University of Idaho likes to say "If you're wearing an Idaho sweatshirt, everyone knows you bought at at the campus bookstore. If you're wearing a Boise State sweatshirt, everyone knows you bought it at Walmart." |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 17, 2021 16:44:21 GMT -8
Obviously Memphis and Boise State would be the next two. I think SDSU is a no brainer. I also think UNLV could turn things around. You can’t do more eastern schools. You need to grow the western front and JNLV has more long term potential than Colorado State. I don't agree that this is "obvious". This isn't going to happen for the next 4 years, and if Boise's football program fades at all they don't bring much else to the equation. Memphis isn't all that valuable either in the big scheme (basketball doesn't carry much weight), and would come down to how strongly they want to move out west (4 or 5 teams, including BYU)? I agree. BYU is a bit on the island right now so adding western schools takes some of the pressure off. And, I agree that Boise is living off their past, they don't bring a market with them. SDSU and UNLV does. I really don't see a B12 move out west that doesn't include SDSU. Same with UNLV, though you could look at BSU and CSU in that argument as well. |
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Sept 17, 2021 19:51:36 GMT -8
I stil think usc and oregon are prime candidate for the big ten. They are now clearly second place behind the sec. They will want to do somerhing to counteract tex and okie leaving for the sec. "The alliance" means nothing. I think the elites of the pac 12 would seriosuly comsider moving to the big ten. Geography would likely prevent that. In football it’s a non-issue, but with your closest conference opponent over 1000 miles away and most 2000 and some even 3000 miles away it is a huge issue. You have to put your swimming and diving team on a 4 hour plane flight to compete anywhere away from home, and they’re away from school a couple extra days just because of the travel. I just can’t see it. Even for basketball,I’m stead of playing all of your conference games on the west coast you’re having to travel to the Midwest and east coast to play 2 or 3 time zones away. I don’t see any scenario where that works for anybody. i could see usc and oregon do it for basketball and footnall only. or i could see them cutting sports out right to save costs |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Sept 17, 2021 20:35:57 GMT -8
Good point, problem is your forgetting they allowed Arizona State in. My Golden Retriever could get into ASU. ASU is a Tier 1 research institution. Boise is basically a glorified junior college that doesn’t even have PhD programs. That’s the difference. Yeah people are thinking "oh ASU, easy party school to get into" - but that's looking at going there in undergrad, not graduate school. They have good Ph.D. programs at ASU - and we don't have many PhD programs because we have to partner with a PhD granting institution to offer them as joint programs due to our CSU status. Which again is why we have very little chance of ever getting into the PAC12 unless we are enabled by the state legislature to offer standalone PhD, and/or we partner with PAC12 school in developing shared research agendas. Academics move things in the PAC12 more then people realize. |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Sept 17, 2021 20:59:29 GMT -8
Geography would likely prevent that. In football it’s a non-issue, but with your closest conference opponent over 1000 miles away and most 2000 and some even 3000 miles away it is a huge issue. You have to put your swimming and diving team on a 4 hour plane flight to compete anywhere away from home, and they’re away from school a couple extra days just because of the travel. I just can’t see it. Even for basketball,I’m stead of playing all of your conference games on the west coast you’re having to travel to the Midwest and east coast to play 2 or 3 time zones away. I don’t see any scenario where that works for anybody. i could see usc and oregon do it for basketball and footnall only. or i could see them cutting sports out right to save costs Zero chance either Oregon or USC leaves for football & BB only. They'd have to put all their other sports in 3rd tier conferences and that's not happening. There are requirements for fielding a certain # of sports for conference membership so can't see them cutting enough programs to make it feasible. There'd also be too much pushback from donors. |
|
|
|
Post by panammaniac on Sept 18, 2021 4:30:59 GMT -8
i could see usc and oregon do it for basketball and footnall only. or i could see them cutting sports out right to save costs Zero chance either Oregon or USC leaves for football & BB only. They'd have to put all their other sports in 3rd tier conferences and that's not happening. There are requirements for fielding a certain # of sports for conference membership so can't see them cutting enough programs to make it feasible. There'd also be too much pushback from donors. Yep, you can’t just cut non-revenue sports to save costs, for many reasons. You have to sponsor a certain number of sports to maintain membership and D-1 status, and there’s something called Title IX that becomes a problem. With football you have 85 scholarship athletes, so you have to come up with 85 athletics scholarships for female athletes to offset that, and cheerleading doesn’t count (even though it should). Any PAC school moving to the B1G is highly unlikely just due to geography and travel costs alone. Colorado could possibly pull it off, geographically speaking, but of course the B1G won’t be going after them. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 18, 2021 12:05:14 GMT -8
ASU is a Tier 1 research institution. Boise is basically a glorified junior college that doesn’t even have PhD programs. That’s the difference. But they do have a truck driving school!!! : ) LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 18, 2021 12:10:20 GMT -8
i could see usc and oregon do it for basketball and footnall only. or i could see them cutting sports out right to save costs Zero chance either Oregon or USC leaves for football & BB only. They'd have to put all their other sports in 3rd tier conferences and that's not happening. There are requirements for fielding a certain # of sports for conference membership so can't see them cutting enough programs to make it feasible. There'd also be too much pushback from donors. Yeah, me either. I'd see the BIG poach some PAC12 schools long before that. Still don't understand why they haven't. The SEC is the dominant conference, the BIG is next and the AAC and PAC are fighting for 3rd. We are now down to just four "power conferences" and the SEC is dictating terms. The Big12 is now the "Best of the rest" but ceases being a "power" conference when UT and OK leaves |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Sept 18, 2021 12:17:56 GMT -8
ASU is a Tier 1 research institution. Boise is basically a glorified junior college that doesn’t even have PhD programs. That’s the difference. But they do have a truck driving school!!! : ) Lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 18, 2021 12:19:23 GMT -8
Zero chance either Oregon or USC leaves for football & BB only. They'd have to put all their other sports in 3rd tier conferences and that's not happening. There are requirements for fielding a certain # of sports for conference membership so can't see them cutting enough programs to make it feasible. There'd also be too much pushback from donors. Yep, you can’t just cut non-revenue sports to save costs, for many reasons. You have to sponsor a certain number of sports to maintain membership and D-1 status, and there’s something called Title IX that becomes a problem. With football you have 85 scholarship athletes, so you have to come up with 85 athletics scholarships for female athletes to offset that, and cheerleading doesn’t count (even though it should). Any PAC school moving to the B1G is highly unlikely just due to geography and travel costs alone. Colorado could possibly pull it off, geographically speaking, but of course the B1G won’t be going after them. You do realize that most PAC schools have way more sports than needed to keep their D1 status, right? The minimum number of men's sports required is just 6. You want to know which sport is a huge luxury? Men's track and field. The number of athletes to support that is huge and requires you to have a men's cross country team as well. Neither makes money. So, you find any school in the PAC-12 that has men's track and field program and you can quickly eliminate that sport. Oregon would take the biggest hit but their Nike sponsorship would make that unnecessary. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Sept 18, 2021 21:12:12 GMT -8
Yep, you can’t just cut non-revenue sports to save costs, for many reasons. You have to sponsor a certain number of sports to maintain membership and D-1 status, and there’s something called Title IX that becomes a problem. With football you have 85 scholarship athletes, so you have to come up with 85 athletics scholarships for female athletes to offset that, and cheerleading doesn’t count (even though it should). Any PAC school moving to the B1G is highly unlikely just due to geography and travel costs alone. Colorado could possibly pull it off, geographically speaking, but of course the B1G won’t be going after them. You do realize that most PAC schools have way more sports than needed to keep their D1 status, right? The minimum number of men's sports required is just 6. You want to know which sport is a huge luxury? Men's track and field. The number of athletes to support that is huge and requires you to have a men's cross country team as well. Neither makes money. So, you find any school in the PAC-12 that has men's track and field program and you can quickly eliminate that sport. Oregon would take the biggest hit but their Nike sponsorship would make that unnecessary. Uh.... but their Nike sponsorship is also predicated on the schools running tradition. That is how Nike came to be in the first place. No, Oregon would fight eliminating Track and Field and Cross Country to the death IMO. It's a huge part of their identity, and the Nike identity. |
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on Sept 18, 2021 21:29:51 GMT -8
New roomer be thrown around, not sure where it started (maybe here!) but I think it must be real if people here start talking about it.
(the PAC is falling apart)
USC and Uni. of Oregon want to jump out of the Pac12 and Join the Mountain West.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecnails on Sept 18, 2021 23:54:11 GMT -8
The plus for unlv is now playing football at Allegiant Stadium and hoops at the Thomas and Mack. The bad news is the football is a bad lost 48-3 to Iowa State today.
|
|
