Arizona grad here. Arizona won't leave the PAC 12 because of the prestige of being associated with the California schools. They will let sports revenue tank to be associated with those schools.
I'll copy/paste and earlier comment here. Perhaps you have some thoughts: I think we can ignore the power gap between the existing "power" conferences for now, so that just leaves the growing revenue per team gap and how that may have long-term effects on competitiveness across all sports. Since I see no way for the PAC12 to get close to peer with the SEC & B1G in the foreseeable future, the $64K question is whether the PAC12 teams that could possibly leave for the B1G will so leave? Would adding a HOUSTON +1 (AAU or not) materially change these current realities?
@@tarheel7406 lots of things up in the air right now like you said. There's also the 30-50 team mega conference talk. Im surprised the big 10 hasn't taken Oregon and USC. Maybe they asked too much in taking Oregon state and UCLA too? But there's also conversation that the CFP will naturally cause the realignment and that's what they are waiting for.
@@davidaz6622 "if that's the case, the Arizona schools will follow." To where? If all of the California schools are leaving to the same place, it's to the B1G, which likely has no interest in the Arizona schools.
Money RULES the day. $$$. Nobody watching college football or basketball cares about a students GPA. The Big 12 needs to expand to at least 16 teams to survive. USC and Oregon to the Big 10 starts the chain reaction . Strike west Big 12 .We are the best league in basketball 🏀.
"PAC12 adding Oklahoma State & Texas Tech make the most sense" But they didn't ~9 months ago, so apparently not enough sense. We have recent history folks. We don't have to guess unless there's a material change in circumstances.
@@tarheel7406 i think the new vommish just coming in the playoff espn monopoly fight and division were more likely the reason Now all 3 are settled expamding into the midwes/ texas with pods for more eyeballs.
Regionally speaking, I think they both are fine. And as a Utah fan I have a bit of loyality to the PAC because they gave Utah their shot. B12 kicked out teams to the g5 who have never made it back. The pac has been stable, that's my opinion.
The Southwest Conference folded. Texas and Oklahoma convinced the Big Eight to expand to twelve teams. That left room for four additional schools in the Big 8. The new league was named the Big Xll. The four new schools were Texas, Texas Tech. Texas A&M and Baylor. The rest of the SWC were cut loose to go to other conferences. Texas immediately took over the Big Xll and began bullying the original Eight schools. Then Colorado. Nebraska, TexasA&M and Missouri got tired of the poop 💩 that Texas was force feeding them and left. TCU made back to the power 5 level. Houston was next and hopefully SMU will make it back eventually. I really don't see Rice ever getting back to the Power 5 level again. I've been around almost 68 years now. I still see things that floor me from time to time. Sorry if I can't give you more encouragement. Hang in there. Vaughn 🐯
@@davidmesser5813 Appreciate the history. It's my understanding that one of the main reasons the SWC failed was being almost exclusively Texas schools. Why should the new BIG12 expand and create similar risks?
@@tarheel7406 This is a good point...Baylor, TCU, Tech and Houston are enough Texas schools...the Pac has four California teams and they never talk about adding more CA teams...
Disagreeing is fine but it's childish when you start saying stuff like that.. and as far as why?? Bc college football is CHANGING and schools are gonna go where they're gonna make the most money and have the BEST chances of making the playoffs..... it's not the 1980s,1990s or early 2000s anymore..
This could actually happen but most likely it just emulates what the Big XII did after losing OU and UT. IF the Big I comes and takes UCLA, USC, UW and UO....then the Pac 12 could try to salvage itself with teams from the Big XII, Fresno, Boise, etc. or they could fold into the Big XII. So today's is the most feasible video you have made this month. :) Big Question is whether or not Big I is more interested in the West Coast or the East Coast. Your title could likewise be "Big XII or ACC puts the other out of business" if the Big I chose the East route of expansion.
Big 12 will not be able to raid the Pac 12 unless the Big I raids first. They would prefer to stay with the Pac 12. Big 12 could add 4 teams but not those listed. Boise, Memphis, USF, and East Carolina, Liberty, Marshall, North Dakota State, Montana, Hawaii, UAB, Ga. State, Ga. Southern, or teams of that ilk could certainly be in play but no way you are getting teams from the Big 4 unless the Big I raids either the ACC or the Pac 12. Just a splash of reality. But I do believe the Big I will raid one of those which is why it is interesting to see what that conference does...If they plan to raid the Pac 12 it will be rapidly upon us with the Pac 12 tv contract coming up. If they pass...it will show they are are eyeing ACC teams instead and will have to wait till mid 2030's due that conferences tv contract.
Only possible scenario is the Big 10 waits to see what the SEC gets with the OU/Tex addition. Then they pounce on 4-6 PAC 12 teams, namely USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, (maybe Cal and Stanford). If they only take the 2 LA teams, the PAC either stays put at 10 or grabs a few Big 12 teams. IF the big 10 takes 4-6 teams, then the Big 12 will be able to lure the AZ school, Utah, and Colorado. But that's the only way they get them is if the Big take the top 4-6 teams.
I suspect it the PAC12 would have to lose 5-6 for any remainders to leave, and then only if they decide to abandon the then outliers ORSTATE & WASTATE. The "PAC12" brand is just worth more and the new BIG12 keeps diluting itself.
Utah fan here! Love the content GB dude. I speak for most utah fans when I say we love the PAC. We’ve built rivalries and have built some great tradition here. Honestly, Houston would be a great add to the PAC in a few years. They are actively trying to attain AAU status which is heavily valued in the PAC. If they have a solid next couple years and achieve AAU status, I wouldn’t be shocked to see the PAC try to grab them and someone else.
I think we can ignore the power gap between the existing "power" conferences for now, so that just leaves the growing revenue per team gap and how that may have long-term effects on competitiveness across all sports. Since I see no way for the PAC12 to get close to peer with the SEC & B1G in the foreseeable future, the $64K question is whether the PAC12 teams that could possibly leave for the B1G will so leave? Would adding a HOUSTON +1 (AAU or not) materially changes these current realities?
Tar Heel I’ve always thought grabbing teams in Texas would be huge, but who knows from a revenue standpoint if it actually matters at all or not. PAC cares a lot more about the things most conferences don’t prioritize
@@alecseljaas8063 So far from experience PAC12 fans remind me of the WWI era Japanese Army vs. Navy. Isolated on the West Coast. The imperial Army trained at home, so it had little idea of its strengths and weaknesses. The Navy traveled the world to ports of call and was very aware. Anyway, the PAC12 would likely change priorities if the biggest brands that drove those priorities leave. Largely due to more academic outliers, the PAC12 is already 3rd of the power conferences, and gutting the conference would leave those outliers as a larger percentage of the remainders. I suspect a depleted PAC12 would then just look at value and proximity for replacements.
The new Pac12 Commish is trying his best to satisfy usc to stay put in pac12 and keep the conference intact. If he fails , all options will be wide open.
@@bayoubull717 "Tell me, how much more will each PAC member be worth when USC doesn't renew their PAC GOR....along with 1 to 3 other members?" That remains to be seen and assumes it will happen, yet I do know that losing 2-4 of one's best brands remains a smaller loss than losing 6-7. Again, we know that the PAC12 currently distributes ~$40M per team annually and that the new BIG12 will be ~$20M based on professional general consensus. At some point the Roman Empire contains more barbarians than Romans.
Your problem is a PAC12 that loses "just" USC & OR remains more valuable and respected than the new BIG12 after it will have lost 6-7 of its best teams. I would also suspect that the then new PAC10 would stand pat and trust that UCLA, WASH & UTAH will rise to fill the power vacuum. It will take a much deeper PAC12 depletion to shake any remainders free.
I’m a BIGXII fan and your a PAC12 fan. Hopefully things calm down and there is no more realignment , but if teams go from one league to the other it’s PAC12 teams coming to the BIGXII cause the PAC12 doesn’t want any of the BIGXII teams. Lol 😆 Like I’ve posted on this video there’s around a 5% chance of this happening as is but if the B1G “accepts” a few of the PAC12’s top brands then the chances jumps to 50%. IMO
@@justincooke9676 So an ACC that currently distributes ~$35-40M per team annually and desperately needs to catch up with the SEC & B1G in this regard should add teams from a conference with an estimated value of ~$20M per? Academic and geo outliers to boot? Is your goal to accelerate an ACC depletion?
PAC 12, if it expands to 16, will be interested in Houston, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, Kansas. They might be interested in Boise St, Iowa St, and Kansas St, but probably not enough academic clout to take a serious look a them. There are no other schools west of the Mississippi that would garner enough mutual interest for them to even consider. If the PAC 12 wants to expand it needs to do so and soon, but with the upcoming TV deal, I doubt they will look to expand prior to that time. Unfortunately, I don't see the TV deal for the PAC12 amounting to much (I could be wrong), and if so, most schools will do a hard pass on any PAC 12 invite.
We have recent history and the PAC12 passed on all of the BIG12 remainders ~9 months ago. A new thought does come to mind during this response though, as that decision was made when the Alliance formed, namely a proposed scheduling agreement. The B1G appears to now be refusing to go forward with that agreement. Would no agreement in the near future cause the PAC12 to reconsider expansion? Would no agreement cause some PAC12 teams to give up on the conference and leave? Just as I think the B1G would only accept a 4-6 team bloc from the PAC12, I suspect the PAC12 would demand the same from the new BIG12.
Baylor is also R1 Carniege status now. Despite what the narrative is, the academics were the reason that BYU wasn't added previously. The PAC-12 seriously considered adding them in the 90's but their lack of high research status academically is what kept them from getting an invite. ISU was also AAU until a few weeks ago so them and KU are some of the highest "academically" ranking in the Big-12.
@@eujr4SC One must still put academics in relative perspective. The three Alliance conferences all have high average academic rankings. Looking again at the Tony Altimore chart, the five highest ranked new BIG12 schools are BYU, TCU, BAYLOR, IWSTATE & KANSAS. All of these would be fringe or outliers for the Alliance conferences.
@@tarheel7406 Very true. I would also add that I feel his academic rankings were a little flawed as he mostly focused on the US News report published every year. Which I think has a lot of good information I feel that some of the metric weights are a little off. I know we've had that discussion before. TCU and BYU get the benefit of being smaller private schools with higher retention and graduation rates which help in their academic USNWR standings. They're both still not R1 or AAU. His overall report was fascinating and a lot of which I knew and was interested in learning more about in comparing to other conferences. But putting it into perspective with all of his other categories again just adds more fuel to the fire on why the PAC has chosen not to expand, and I think in the end they will have the upper hand in future expansion plans if they really needed to.
Mizzou fan here. I like your ideas about adding from the Pac 12. I don't think Utah will come into the Big Xll. Colorado, Arizona and Arizona State are probable to coming into the Big Xll. Add Boise State to the Big Xll and you have a 5 team pod in the west. If Mizzou and Nebraska comes back to the Big Xll you have a 5 team Midwest pod with Iowa State, Kansas and Kansas State. South pod would be Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor and Houston. East pod West Virginia, Cincinnati, Memphis State, UCF and USF. I can see the Big 10 picking up USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington from the Pac 12. I can also see the Big 10 getting Virginia and Virginia Tech. Love the show Dude. Take care. Vaughn 🐯
Again, the B1G would not be interested in 2 teams from Virginia, much less the non-AAU VATECH. It will be UVA & UNC, two schools that the B1G has been trying to pull for some years now.
IMO, PAC could probably pic off at least 2 B12 teams, which I also mentioned OSU and Baylor a few weeks back but possible others. This is probably what happens provided all 12 PAC teams stay. If some bolt to the B10 or even say SEC which makes no sense then may be an argument that P12 teams do decide by where the better money is. How about thinking beyond which conference poaches who and the possibility that if some PAC teams do bolt that there might be just a complete merger of the PAC and B12? As much as I despise the thought of these mega "super conferences" that may be the way to go. I am just finding it hard to see expanding just to expand with G5 programs is adding any value.
a) Just as the B1G would want a 4-6 team PAC12 bloc, I suspect the PAC12 would want something similar from the new BIG12. b) I doubt even a heavily depleted PAC12 would actually merge with the now depleted and diluted new B1G12. It would be a poach.
@@tarheel7406 That is a major point. B12 adding more G5 teams then thinking that would attract the Arizona schools, Utah and Colorado isn't happening, all that clump of mess does not scream big TV bucks. Should have just went with 2 adds for now.
@Jason V Let's be fair, there's a difference between surviving roughly as is vs. as a legal entity. a) If the PAC12 doesn't deplete to the B1G, both will likely survive as is. b) If the PAC12 does so deplete, it depends on whether the P12 remainders abandon ORSTATE/WASTATE and scatter or they stick together and rebuild. c) If they scatter, the PAC12 likely dies. If the stick together, they likely poach at least 4 from the new BIG12, and it lingers as an entity. d) If the ACC and PAC12 deplete, then I suspect all remaining teams outside of the new B1G/SEC with any decent value go east or west to the surviving ACC/PAC12 to be distant Tier 2s, which would kill the new BIG12. i just don't see enough quality teams to support three Tier 2s. e) If just the ACC depletes, we would have a similar outcome.
Right now at this point in time, the Big XII makes more money, now after Oklahoma and Texas leave, the PAC 12 and the Big XII get new TV deals within 5 years, that's when we'll see who's worth more money, but right now it's the Big XII...
@@GoldBlueDude the Big12 makes a bit more off tv deal but look at the total revenues for both conferences and it isn’t close at all. UCLA makes more money off one home game then any Big12 school. Plus look at donations to each school since Oklahoma St lost their huge donor it’s not even close anymore. Then you look at the money from apparel Pac12 is far ahead of Big12. If you add academics money into it the Pac12 is probably the 2nd strongest conference with the Big12 down in last
@@jeffgrimm2955 These new BIG12 fans keep referencing the current media deal that includes TX/OK. The most common projection is down to ~$20M per team annually after they leave, and I've seen/heard as low as ~$10M. If the PAC12 lost just USC, it wouldn't lose half its media value.
Big 12 has to wait to see if USC and Oregon join the big 10, that’s when you pounce on the Arizona schools, Colorado and Utah. Memphis is the only other G5 would be worth it to add.
Or.......the big 12 could go on offense and push for USC, UCLA, OREGON, AND UTAH.....why wait for someone else to make your choices for you.....especially when you'd be left with a list that has the 2 Arizona schools.....their trash 🗑
The PAC12 can survive losing "just" USC & OR. The BIG12 would need both a heavy depletion and the remainders abandoning ORSTATE & WASTATE to have a chance at poaching any.
Not sure what way it will go if it does go one way or another. But as a BYU fan I would love to have BYU and Utah in the same conference again. It would bring back a lot more meaning in a rivalry that just hasn't been the same. Colorado makes sense given their location in relation to Big 12 country. The AZ schools would bring a big market and the Wildcats and Sun Devils can get better in football. Will it happen? I really don't know but time will tell.
SOME TALK AS IT THAT NEBRASKA AND COLORADO MAY BE LOOKING BACK TO BIG 12 SINCE TEXAS IS GONE… BIG 12 SHOULD GO AFTER THE FOLLOWING - AU ASU UCLA STANFORD CAL UTAH USC IF POSSIBLE… AND IF POSSIBLE NC VIRGINIA NSU DUKE FLORIDA STATE CLEMSON WVU CINCINNATI CFU BE A TRANSCONTINENTAL CONFERENCE BUT A ELITE ONE AT THAT…
The Pac 12 is here to stay. It is a Regional Conference supported by the biggest high school football state in the nation in California. The Big 12 is a little more amorphous. I hope it lasts, especially as a BYU Football guy.
@@GoldBlueDude that may be but I never get from those that say this ever has a good reason .. And I can tell you a lot about 4 schools in North Carolina that I never went to but had very great patties out lol.. But the only thing I could ever agree they have is basketball and one hella Duke heart center hospital with a big industry park that brings those schools tons of money and to be honest is the only reason they are still a live .. Duke/ Carolina has the best top rate hospital even over Ohio states no joke ... They really don't have much going for them than that sorry .. I know I'll be cussed for this but it is true .. We do and have had a reall half decent basketball and football and well now baseball and shooting team to add the soccer team has even produced great success .. You will here way more about the guys sports in Carolina than girls .. We have some of the toughest gals in ours the big twelve really .. But anyway .. I just wonder you either hear we bring nothing or we are moutian hillbilliy racist I don't know .. West Virginia does bring many pros in to our house just to practice or train in our facilities you can bank on that to football and baseball in which we do have a professional team they pull players from that go to the majors .. Just as North North Carolina does ... So yea I'm not sure what we don't bring ..
@@backwoods7678 If you don't know by now (after ~9 months) why the ACC has no interest in WVU, then you likely never will. For the record, UNC is the top all around sports school in the ACC and is one of only three schools to win the Director's Cup. Per the Tony Altimore chart, WVU would be at best average in all sports across all schools and near the bottom of the current ACC.
I'm getting old lol I want the simple hard hitting playing play or leave days back .. When you went to school got the education and played for that school that excepted you because they saw potential in you to help you grow .. Not pay what I'm not yet worth and I'll think about your school than . .. Everyone grows bout no one is so talented they are paid top dollar to be taught .. It takes years to grow billions for some and most that make it to nfl don't because they already grown before they get there .. Be a young adult for more years than a man when you know how to manage yourself without someone's help like you know the agents that promise them the golden life until you fall than your nobody with nothing asking for help you didn't need when you wore young .. I way more failures than success now than you did from the old days kids .. Whoops .. This why I need to stay off here lol .. My old man mouth just can't stay shut and yes I own my bussniss well the government does . .. Lmao .. As always appreciate everyone ..
not to be insulting here, but the big 12 is basically the big east circa 2004. it's like a slightly bigger conference USA. outside of kansas basketball, there are no iconic brands in the conference. just a bunch of recently uplifted mid-majors. the pac 12 has several iconic brands. multiple schools that have won or at least played for national championships in the past 30 or so years. the pac 12 is certainly down right now, but they're still the bigger brand by far. if any absorbing happens, it'll be the pac 12 absorbing some of the big 12. the only way it goes the other direction, is if the big 10 raids the pac 12 first. if the big 10 were to take a few of those iconic brands, then big 12 would then be able to pick over the scraps. barring that, the pac 12 will not be losing out to the big 12.
These new BIG12 fans just don't get it. Everything you said is basically true. Even though the PAC12 is down competitively, it's still full of important flagships, big "little brothers", and top private schools. It continues to have its history/prestige and the respect of the other legacy power conferences.
@Jason V Mostly correct. If there's a consolidation down to two megas, it will go something like: B1G adds a 6-team PAC12 bloc, UNC/UVA/ND +1 SEC adds CLEMSON, FSU, NCSTATE, VATECH +4 If MIAMI makes it, it will be part of the SEC +4
@Jason V I'll expand as well: a) I suspect you are correct on the PAC-6, but I prefer to defer to the applicable fans and alumn of the B1G and PAC12. b) From following the story since late July, I was surprised to learn that UVA/UNC came close to leaving for the BIG some years ago, but ultimately passed. I suspect that the current environment has changed things. c) I've heard reports that there's already a legal strategy to deal with GOR, and I have many times offered my theories on what it might be. d) I'm assuming that an ACC depleting of its best brands and further consolidation will make ND see the writing on the wall.
if jim delaney were still running the big 10, i think this trigger would've been pulled a long time ago. i think kevin warren lacks the experience and aggressiveness to have made this happen by now. it seems like he's getting there though. also as pointed out, there are legal barriers to overcome. i think when the big 10 finally does makes its move, it's going to be seismic. i think they'll go for some combination of usc - the biggest prize out west, and ucla, washington, oregon and colorado. if they can find a way, possibly in conjunction with the sec, to raid the acc, i think they'll go for some combination of unc (and duke if that's a condition of getting unc), ga tech and virginia. the implosion of the pac 12 and acc would force notre dame's hand. i think whatever the big 10 does, they'll save at least one spot for the irish. i think ideally, the big 10 would like to go both east and west. adding usc and notre dame would be texas/oklahoma huge, and several of those other schools would add great value to the conference. however it all shakes out, the college football world is probably going to look very different in the next 10 years or so. incidentally, while i'm here. in regard to gbd's point about wvu to the acc, it's not the craziest idea out there. it kind of makes sense. if the acc starts feeling heat, they may go into survival mode, and gobble up any program they think can help them. wvu would not be a bad fit in that circumstance. geographically, they're a better fit than many of the other candidates they'd consider, and the mountaineers already have built rivalries in conference. 10 years ago, if someone had told me the big 10 will be adding maryland and flippin' rutgers, i'd have said that's crazy talk, but it happened. that addition to the big 10 was more out there than the idea of wvu to the acc.
@@brian_abn "if jim delaney were still running the big 10, i think this trigger would've been pulled a long time ago." It's my understanding that Delaney was the primary force to get UVA/UNC, but were politely rejected at that time. I also suspect those efforts were revisited prior to the MD/RUT additions. "i think they'll go for some combination of usc - the biggest prize out west, and ucla, washington, oregon and colorado." I'll let others debate as to who the PAC-6 will be. My only position is that it will likely only be 6 for a self-contained pod and that logistics/economies of scale will be considered. A more general consideration will be post-consolidation football potential. Consolidating down to only 48 teams that matter will have drastic effects on the survivors in recruiting alone, as some teams will have their traditional regional rivals downgraded. I will say that CO could be a 7th PAC pull since geo its close enough to existing B1G members. "i think whatever the big 10 does, they'll save at least one spot for the irish." Maybe. If the ultimate plan is two 24-team mega conferences, there will be a last call. If The B1G gets its PAC-6, UNC & UVA, that leaves +2. If ND holds out, that +2 will be filled. In the end, 48 of the best teams will have a broad and deep national following that wouldn't really need ND. "f the acc starts feeling heat, they may go into survival mode, and gobble up any program they think can help them. wvu would not be a bad fit in that circumstance." Yeah, you are suffering from GBD logic. If one's conference is suffering flight risks due to the revenue deficit with the B1G/SEC, one doesn't make the revenue gap worse. The only logic perhaps would be to pack the ACC with more schools with no options for the SEC/B1G in the hopes of making escape harder. Yes, the percentage of teams wanting to leave lowers, but the strength of the legal challenge on grounds increases. In a perverse way, UVA/UNC may be hoping WVU is added over their objections.
The Big 12 should STOP dilly dallying around and be pro active and GET Colorado, Arizona and Arizona State RIGHT NOW. Forget about the Boise States And Memphis of the world. Good stadiums and fan bases. Maybe then, the Pitts and VPIs would want to join us
And by what feasible means would the new BIG12 pull CO, AZ & AZSTATE without a prior PAC12 depletion? What intangibles are to be gained at the cost of less revenue? Less prestige?
@@tarheel7406 so you think their is more prestige with Memphis and Boise? Hardly! I would even question the move to add central Florida and maybe Cincinnati ( at least before or minus Luke Fickell) anyway. IF the big 12 became more aggressive maybe it would force the NCAA to do their job and bring this conference musical chairs to and end. They won’t! Too much high dollar influence with ESPN and sports agents to make THAT happen. SO.... Big 12 get off your butt and at least TRY to pluck off the better apples on a tree and widen the boundaries of your league before its GONE
@@josephthomas4513 Let me rephrase: And by what feasible means would the new BIG12 pull CO, AZ & AZSTATE without a prior PAC12 depletion? What intangibles are to be gained by those three schools by joining the BIG12 at the cost of less revenue? Less prestige?
I’m seeing a lot of people who have NO IDEA what they’re talking about here. The PAC 12 just had their worst year in their history from a lot of perspectives thanks to probably the most incompetent football commissioner in CFB’s history. He is now gone, half of the conference is trending up, WE HAVE THE BLUE BLOOD(S) not the big 12. The PAC cares more about the things other conferences don’t. Academics, Olympic sports, etc… and they all have strong relationships with the other universities. I’d say USC were to leave they would demand UCLA come with, same with Arizona schools and Nor. Cal schools. The new TV deals will open the eyes of many who have no idea what they’re talking about currently. The big 12 would be lucky to get near what the pac 12 will get. Anyone saying the PAC will dissolve is blind.
I try and objectively defend the PAC12, but its fans need to get a better handle on where the conference currently stands relative to the other "power" conferences: a) Last season isn't the issue; it is now years of little to no top level success in the revenue sports. b) The other Alliance conferences also care about academics and non-revenue sports. From following this story, among the P5 the PAC12 is the top dog in Olympic sports but is 3rd academically and 5th in top level revenue sport competition. c) In market value per team, I'd estimate the PAC12 to be 4th. If you think the top PAC12 brands aren't flight risks to a B1G which generates more revenue per team, has highly competitive revenue and non-revenue sports, and has a higher average academic ranking, then call me blind.
Tar Heel I think it’s surely a possibility. Do I think it’s a probable possibility? No I don’t. Like I said many universities won’t separate from each other which makes things difficult, also the PAC doesn’t prioritize football, they find revenue from other places. I don’t think any team would leave simply for football. I also think USC enjoys being the top dog, In the big 10 they’d become one of 4/5 top dogs
@@alecseljaas8063 "Do I think it’s a probable possibility? No" Okay, I always defer to PAC12 fans/alumn if the claim is reasonable enough and reconciles with other facts. If the PAC12 stands pat, as I can't see it expand just to expand, then I can just see the ACC depleting to the B1G and SEC, likely to ~20 teams each. The football playoffs likely won't be closed, but perhaps 2 autos each to the SEC & B1G and 1 auto to the PAC12 plus some at larges. ND will likely remain indy and drop its ACC association, having to find a new home for its non-football sports. Tier 1: SEC & B1G Tier 2: PAC12 Tier 3: New BIG12 and new ACC G5s 8-Team playoff with 2-2-1 autobids and 3 at large invites. Likely no per conference cap.
Tar Heel I can’t see a situation where a conference gets two auto bids even in a situation like that… and honestly I think the B1G and SEC would be fine with that knowing they’d get most of the at large’s anyways
My opinion is B12 may be being to proactive and may find itself in a situation it can't back out of if a better idea comes up. They should have just added 2 teams to replace the 2 leaving, then sat on that for now to see what happens. You are not seeing PAC12 on any tear to adding g5 programs and diluting the conference. While I see a lot of comments on the great job B12 is doing, I can't help suspect they are shooting themselves in the foot. The only way B12 attracts Utah, Arizona schools and Colorado is if the PAC splits and some go B10 and there is no additions to add that add value to the conference, but the B12 would have to show how they would benefit in a conference that has loaded up on G5 programs and how that garners big tv revenue. Not to mention PAC brings Rose Bowl. Take a step back and ask yourself again, why is that more attractive?
@@ckstaff I completely concur. Back in Aug I suggested (I rarely say what a party should do) that the BIG12 expand just enough to stay viable and then wait and see if any future PAC12 or ACC remainders become available. It was always going to be harder for the new BIG12 to poach but diluting almost guarantees being poached if it comes to that.
If you pick the right terms to add they won't necesarily be viewed as a G5 team. Look at TCU does anybody see them as a G5 school. Look at Cincinnati and Houston, just because they are coming from à G5 conférence, does anybody see them as G5 schools ? I think they out grew their conférence and deserve to be P5 teams.
The PAC 12 share revenue equally among it's members. That's why no PAC 12 school will leave and it's why the PAC 12 did not accept Texas and OU 5 years ago. Texas wanted to keep all the revenue to themselves and not share it with the PAC 12 schools. PAC 12 owns the west coast so I don't see it going away anytime.
That's not at all what happened. The PAC was going to go to 16 and add CU, Texas, OU, Okie State, Texas A&M Texas Tech. But Texas A&M was eyeing the SEC where they originally wanted to go when the SWC folded. Then A&M and Mizzou got an invite to the SEC. The Big-12 wanted to replace A&M with Baylor but the PAC-12 wanted to invite Utah as a replacement. Baylor threatened to go to the Texas state legislature to prevent Texas and Tech from leaving without them. So the entire deal fell through and Texas and OU created an uneven revenue generation model for the Big-12 and allowed Texas to create the LHN. But with Baylor now having R1 Carniege Status and Houston trying to make a push for AAU, the PAC can have more options in the future. It won't be a big splash like adding Texas and OU like they wanted to do in 2010, but it would pretty much cripple the Big-12. It won't be the other way around though.
Ever see the movie "Hot Tub Time Machine?" Remember the guy who is missing an arm? The Big 12 can fold or can live... but those California teams ain't staying in the PAC. They just aren't, and nothing will keep them from leaving for the B1G.
The PAC 12 should have grabbed BYU, Oklahoma St, Baylor, and Texas Tech. The hole Tier 1 and no religion attitude isn’t helping. Notre Dame isn’t a research university or AAU and the PAC 12 or B10 wouldn’t hesitate in accepting them.
There was a reason that the PAC12 didn't expand ~9 months ago and that window hasn't really closed. As for ND, it's a high academic school with top all around sports and a blue in football. Just checked the Tony Altimore chart for a quick reference, and no other nonaffiliated school is like that. The schools most similar in academics and all sports are WASH, CAL, UNC, UCLA, MICH & USC per that chart. I see no new BIG12 even close, the closest being a distant BYU.
@@toddevans4691 yeah…..that should open the door for Baylor. Baylor vs. Oregon, USC, and Utah, those would be some entertaining games. Especially if you add BYU as well. Unfortunately they have to get over their hang up with religion. (Except for Notre Dame, they get the exemption).
@@tarheel7406 Oh yeah…. Notre Dame’s academics are high. It’s like an Ivy League school of the Midwest. Which is why the B10 and PAC 12 wouldn’t have an issue with AAU membership or being a religious school. Not to mention the great athletics.
@Jason V "There is no scenario where Baylor or BYU ever get invited into the Pac." Unless and perhaps by chance the PAC12 needs a +1 to get ND? It wouldn't be in the PAC12's best interest?
I think geography and all the stupid political drama of Cali... both give the edge to the Big12 over the Pac12. I think the Pac12 will lose USC, Oregon and maybe Washington and UCLA to the big conferences with the big money. I doubt the SEC will expand their footprint that far, when they could just stay regional and add FSU and Clemson instead. So I could easily see the B1G add USC, Oregon and Washington as a partner if they can also land Notre Dame. If they can't get Notre Dame, then maybe they add Washington with UCLA. The point is, the Pac12 has programs with massive brands and massive appeal for the B1G to poach... so they will lose their premiere programs. Once that happens, the Pac12 will be in a bad situation... and NO ONE from any P5 is going to be tempted to join them... quite the opposite. The Big12 will swoop in and grab those 4 schools that you mentioned: Zona, ASU, Utah and Colorado. No one will want the Cali political drama of Cal or Stanford, and no one is really interested in Oregon State or Wazzou. So those remaining schools will probably join the Mountain West, and try to convince the world that the new Mountain West is deserving of a P5 status. Or maybe they keep the Pac12 name, and add the best of the Mountain West and American conferences... either way... they will become G5 level at best. I think adding schools in the Mountain time zone to the Big12 will be a bonus for the conference, but it could be enough for WVU to want to bolt, as they will be so far out in the east. If they do bolt, then I could see the addition of Memphis becoming a reality for the Big12.
Maybe only due to tv markets, not necessarily on the field. Yes losing the LA market with SC and most likely UCLA because the B10 wants the LA market and not split it with the PAC. Yes that would put a dent on a new PAC tv deal. Not sure adding Mountain west or any G5 programs fixes that. I don't buy B10 wants SC and UCLA, they want the LA market more. I have yet to see a good reason why the B10 would be interested in Oregon or any other PAC school unless they want a Pacific division and if that were the case would need more than 4 schools to do that. Which makes me lean more towards the PAC12 stays as is, maybe even attempt to lure a couple of B12 schools if needed to get a TV deal they want.
Why would the AZ schools, Utah, and CO want to add extensive travel to their schedules? All the CA schools, OR schools, and WA schools are in the same time zone, so the AUC schools will give that up to have to play in 2 other times zones that doesn’t even include their own.
The reason for the mountain time zone teams of the PAC12 to move to the New BIGXVI would be to gain access to the central and eastern time zones for occasional games and a league with better access to the CFP. This probably has a 5% chance of happening on its own and a 50% chance if any PAC12 teams leave the league first for the money of the B1G. Utah and CU are a better blind fit in the BIGXII.
Unless somehow the BIG12 could offer $10M more per team than the PAC12 I don’t see it happening. The only Conference I could see any PAC12 school leaving to join is the B1G and SEC. LA, SF, Oakland, Portland, Seattle are better markets combined than Dallas, Houston, and Orlando. The BIG12 would be better off waiting for the 2 Power Conferences to form and trying to consolidate leftovers. The BIG12 should just add the 3 Service Academies and Memphis.
@@jeffwatson68 "The reason for the mountain time zone teams of the PAC12 to move to the New BIGXVI would be to gain access to the central and eastern time zones for occasional games and a league with better access to the CFP." a) Why buy games in other time zones when one can rent by scheduling ooc games? b) If the PAC12 is so weak in football, why would moving to the new BIG12 increase CFP chances?
Only real teams in the PAC 12 footprint that are decent are Boise St., SDSU & ??? Maybe Utah State, Colo St., UNLV or Nevada (if not grabbing any Big 12 teams), but they have some serious questions.
@@theecharmingbilly There is always that thought given the Vegas market, unfortunately UNLV has always been absolutely terrible in football. They've poured in a ton of resources into that program for decades & they have been consistently bad, even in just the Mountain West Conference.
@@fanman71 totally agree, underachieve like crazy and they're not good academically but the Pac-12 can help foster all of that while gaining the single most important market outside of the P5 footprint. It's more important than an already boomed San Diego and Boise is a nice city but it's never gonna touch Vegas. Memphis is a great city with all sorts of history but it too is tapped. Vegas is still a baby in a lot of respects. The Big XII and SEC would be be hitting the Pac-12 hard by obtaining it. UNLV doesn't even have to be a juggernaut in sports. It offers a ton outside of UNLV. Of course the Walnut Creek crew wants to keep playing grabass with the 4 snickering mean girls in LA/Bay Area. Getting nothing done for its Athletic Departments or its Athletes. The Pac-12 should be headquartered in Vegas years ago already.
@@theecharmingbilly I agree that the P12 HQ should've been in Vegas & not Walnut Creek. Equidistant from all the programs w/ a lot of hotels & flights in & out everyday. I just wonder if now, even w/ Allegiant Stadium are they ever going to be good. And as w/ SDSU & Boise St there is always the academic ranking question mark, but there has to be some level of desperation in the PAC 12, that like you said unfortunately I don't think they have right now.
Big12 took a good step forward when the picked up the four new teams - four of the best from G5. All four bring good things and are investing in their athletic program. The Pac12 might follow the same path by going after some good regional G5 programs who are likely to make the financial commitment to improve. Teams like San Diego State, Utah State, UNLV. I don't think that raiding other P5 conferences is the answer and I also think that the Pac12 and Big12 will be around for quite some time. But then again, the Southwest Conference died, so who knows?
I don't think so. The PAC 12 has always been extreme selective about who can enter the PAC 12. They are not as open house as the Big 12. Still, I think their hands will get forced because USC and Oregon will join the Big 10. They will have no choice but to open up that conference to many like the Big 12 did
I guarantee the Big 12 dissolves. Texas Tech Kansas State Oklahoma State TCU all will come to the Pac-12. There will be too many eyes on SC games. It will be too appealing for those big 12 teams not to go out west because no one will be watching the big 12 when OU and Texas leave
It's a growing market but it's not "huge," as they are only ranked 100 out of all markets. San Diego, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, and even Fresno are way bigger.
I think it is more likely ACC adds West Virginia for a 15-team league... I also think PAC could swipe Houston/ TCU/ Tx Tech & Oklahoma St... The ol fact Kansas fits in B1G or SEC makes sense as well long term... XII could wind up (depending how viewed) as AAC/ WAC type league...
"I think it is more likely ACC adds West Virginia for a 15-team league..." More likely than what? That aliens arrive with free clean energy and world peace? There is next to zero chance that the ACC adds WVU to its existing members. It may consider WVU as a replacement.
@@kopp0e541 L'VILLE was a must add compromise invite. The ACC is not in a must add situation. It is in a must add high value member situation. An exception does not a new rule make. Why is this so hard for so many to understand. Dating a 5 doesn't mean one must date a 4.
What makes you think the pc12 teams are unhappy? Your content and sources can’t be other UA-cam channels with no resources either lol people want to break up the oc12 so bad lol don’t forget it was the pc12 who was trying to create a super conference first. Thr big12 is only attractive for group of 5 teams West Virginia just makes no sense in the big12
@Jason V I suspect that Bowlsby believed (or perhaps was advised) that the only way the new BIG12 would possibly get an autobid is with a 12-team playoff (5 of 12). I doubt that there will be more than 4 autos in an 8-team format, and which current "power" was going to be voted out?
@Jason V a) I haven't considered how the new BIG12 expansions have hurt the remaining de facto P4, but your arguments are interesting. In short, the same reasons FSU/MIAMI (and by extension the ACC) wouldn't want to invite UCF are the same reasons they didn't want to see UCF added by any "power" conference. The shop is actually closed but the new BIG12 is trying to get some in the backdoor. b) One can see this in how the prior and current BIG12 backfills all think they are now peers with the traditional schools that have always mattered. c) I stated that when Bowlsby resigned, one of the reasons was because he had no respect from his peers after getting played by the SEC and almost messed up the playoff expansion. The TX/OK leak stopped it for now. d) I don't think that the B1G has a lot of faith in Warren. It's the biggest bear in the Alliance, yet Phillips seems to be the lead on the CFP expansion concerns and now the PAC12 is the first to drop divisions. e) I had earlier thought that the Alliance could possibly get a per conference cap and an 8-team playoff in exchange for a BIG12 auto, but your position is that the four legacy conferences are united in locking the B12 out. These BIG12 fans don't seem to get it. A conference can't lose 6-7 of its best members and then dilute itself and expect to be treated as a peer. (I've been using "dilute" for some time now. Interesting to read the same term here.) Yes, there will be a period of years where some on field success will remain, but over time these movements will tell. Well, let's remember that our teams will be survivors. I try to be objective and truthful without grave dancing.
@Jason V why would they agree to 12 team play off are you really ok with getting only 1 team in and watch the sec get 5 in every year. As a big12 fan you will only g RT one seat at the play off table and Texas and Oklahoma will still have a play off seat with a 12 team format. It’s a reason the sec doesn’t want auto bids for the new format. So realistically a 12 team format will give everybody else a better shot at the play offs. The sec is only getting harder a 2-3 lost sec team will not get in over a 1 loss conference champ
@Jason V A lot in the last comment. (BTW, you have no idea how refreshing it is to have an exchange with a sane, knowledgeable, etc. person in this venue.) a) It's been claimed that the NCAA designates which are the "power" (lay term) conferences. I suspect the NCAA would respect the demands of the surviving de facto "powers" and revise, but even if not, I would think the de factos could just name the conferences which get an auto when the new playoff is expanded by agreement. b) No further consolidation of the remaining "powers" is really required, but that would require some revenue sharing at some "league" level. Without that, the chase for more revenue per team will cause that consolidation. c) I'm not sure anti-trust concerns come into play if the survivors decide to have their own exclusive playoff. No legal benefits are granted, just bragging rights. All of these power conferences are already exclusive. The problems will likely occur when trying to implement parity rules (e.g. NIL eligibility that would come close to a salary cap). That's more of an initial thoughts thing. d) My position on the Alliance was that it was created during the early chaos. I think it was to keep the PAC12 from making panic expansions and prematurely asking for B1G invites, to provide the B1G with allies for the playoff fight, and to keep the ACC from quickly scattering (resulting in an even more buffed SEC). e) You may poo-poo the proposed scheduling agreement, but I saw some real potential in creating value by sharing big brand wealth. (I've used a molecule sharing electrons as an analogy.) Both the PAC12 and ACC need to increase their per team revenue, and a binding scheduling agreement could have closed some of the gap. I now believe that the B1G determined that the P12 and ACC boats would have risen more (but not higher) than theirs, so they've backed out. f) Frankly, I see no reason to keep the basketball challenge with the B1G if they can't return the favor. I never anticipated all teams would get an Alliance game, just the top ~ 4 finishers from the prior year. If the ACC depletes, a lot more members will be looking to land in a mega SEC than in the B1G, so perhaps building ties there now would be prudent. I also can't see why the PAC12 and ACC can't just have their own football scheduling agreement. UNC really enjoyed its last trip out west to play USC.
Arizona State, Stanford & UCLA WILL LEAVE the PAC-12, possibly ARIZONA and UTAH as well! ASU will 'cause they are NOT valued by the PAC-12 like OREGON & USC.
@Jason V "Do you know anything about how prestigious academic institutions work?" Under which rock have you been living? No, they have no idea. They think the B1G will drop its AAU requirement. They think the ACC will take the statewide community college of WVU. They think the BIG12 can pull a number of teams from the PAC12 and ACC without any prior departures from these conferences. There is no unifying academic culture in the BIG12, so it's disposable for the slightest reason.
@Jason V NOT UNLESS USC & Oregon bolts and by the way the PAC-12 is a FUCKIN' JOKE: STAT FACTS - - the PAC-12 has NEVER GONE to College Football Playoff SINCE 2016 (Since Washington GOT THEIR ASSES handed to them by ALABAMA just like ANY WACK-12 team) & OKLAHOMA has been to the playoff MORE than the WACK-12 combine. @Jason V maybe YOUR league should MERGE with the IVY LEAGUE, tsk tsk tsk!
Okay this is what you are missing about Colorado. Culturally the university fits more in the PAC 12. About 10-15% of Colorado students are from California. Approximately 3x alumni base in PAC 12 states vs Big 12 states. So being in PAC 12 improves fundraising over Big 12. In addition, money still better P12 with UT and OU leaving. Also, historically Colorado recruited more in California than in Texas. This might be changing over the next decade. There has to be a big issue event like USC leaving to the B1G.
Good and relevant info regarding CO. Illustrates how GBD thinks backwards. He constantly predicts and wants WVU to go to the ACC, including because that's where the fans and alumn are. On the other hand, he fails to consider things like that for other schools. I call these concerns intangibles. As a comparison, where the alumn live is one of the intangible reasons PSU would consider a move to the ACC. It's been asserted that more PSU alumn live in Florida and the Carolinas (serparately) than live in the entire B1G footprint outside of PA. Losing or gaining intangibles really affects the calculations.
Feelings are nice and help us get through the day, but perception isn't actually reality. Measured by estimated average market value per team and top level on field/court success (weighting towards value), the new BIG12 is unquestionably the 5th best "power" conference. Through in academics, prestige of its members, etc., and the difference is even greater.
@@Georgeavocados Losing their two biggest brands after already losing 4-5 of their bigger brands. I don't get satisfaction by gratuitously pounding on the new B1G12, but pushing back on senseless assertions is another matter.
@@tarheel7406 Conferences with a 1st round pick last year: SEC, B10, ACC, PAC12, AAC, Missouri Valley, Southern Conferences without a first round pick last year: Big 12
@@Georgeavocados Yes, but one year isn't that determinative, especially re: draft picks. Claiming that the new BIG12 deserves to maintain "power" status is defensible, especially when compared to the relatively recent PAC12, but claiming more than that (i.e. 3rd best of 5) doesn't hold up to scrutiny. No harm in making a false boast unless it causes harm by not considering reality when making plans for the future.
I say the PAC 12 survives and thrives. They have a monopoly on every major west coast city and they have been together for decades. (Colorado and Utah 10 years). They also have blue blood program in USC. The new Big 12 may be in trouble. When 1/3 of your conference are group of 5 schools that really hurts the value of the media deal and makes those schools much more vulnerable.
Last season alone, many of group of 5 schools walked all over the PAC schools. There are some schools, like Boise, who are group of 5, but have been huge upset games over power 5 schools. This is their chance to finally step up to that level they’ve been at for years.
PAC 12 should wait 5+ years then after Texas and OU struggle in SEC invite them. Doubt it would work the money will be two good in SEC. That said I expect the PAC 12 to do better than Big 12 with new media contracts.
@@JGlizzy-br9fx And how exactly will the new BIG12 feasibly pull L'VILLE, PITT & VATECH? What intangibles are gained to counter the loss in revenue and prestige?
Doubt enough value to keep the ACC from depleting. Moreover, the UNC-KANSAS ties are likely much weaker than they once were, and KU is just too much of a geo outlier. The ACC needs to improve the football product; it's just fine in basketball. UCONN likely has a better shot as a +1.
Let's circle back to option 3 for a second.....would someone please tell me why in every video that talks about who the big 12 should go after do they always bring up the 2 Arizona school.....their trash 🗑.....in the last 20 years has either one of them won a national championship.....played in a national championship.....won a BCS/new years 6 game.....played in a BCS/new years 6 game.....won the pac 12.....played in the pac 12 championship game.....has either team finished at least 2nd in the pac 12 south lol.....if your going to swing then go for the head.....stop asking for those 2 and start pushing up on USC & UCLA.....and while your at it toss out the vote for Colorado and go balls out for Oregon....you just said that they need name brand schools, and you overlooked what it is that your asking for
Just stop it. Given how the BIG12 has been depleted of its best 6-7 teams and has already diluted itself by added G5 members, the PAC12 either stands pat or (if it loses 4-6 teams) poaches the best of the BIG12 remainders. The only way the new BIG12 pulls any PAC12 remainders (i.e. post depletion) is if ORSTATE and WASTATE are abandoned as then outliers.
@@tarheel7406 I disagree with you.....the pac 12 can only stay alive if it's able to keep USC....truthfully USC could go independent if they wanted to and would miss a beat....how about you reread my post and understand that it was a response to GB dudes number 3 option....it's not about me wishing for anything...it's just be objective and if the big 10 was looking to make a move for pac 12 teams then why shouldn't the big 12 try to beat them to the punch....have a nice day
@@johnteill_ a) The PAC12 can survive if it loses USC. It has enough brands, history, prestige and respect from the other "powers". Again, the BIG12 has lost 6-7 of its best schools, not just TX/OK. b) The new BIG12 will never beat out the B1G for any school they both want. Doubtful any future PAC12 remainder (e.g. AZ) will leave until a PAC12 depletion is certain.
@@tarheel7406 why do you keep saying 6-7 only six schools have left the conference so how could they have lost 7 of their best also two of those schools were Colorado and Missouri they are not big brands at all hell TCU has more history/tradition than either of those two. The big 12 has lost its 4 best brands though being Oklahoma, Texas, Texas a&m, and Nebraska. But I'm the field production three of those teams aren't worth squat. A&m won the big 12 once in it's early years and hasn't done anything since then Texas used to be really good but since 09 they haven't done anything Nebraska has been garbage since even before they left the big 12 only Oklahoma is worth a shit on the field
@@tarheel7406 HAHAHAHAH. If the PAC 12 loses USC, it can forget about being a Power 5. They're one of the few big brands in the conference. I'll put it like this. If USC leaves, the PAC12 leaves relevancy. Especially if they lose another team with it like Utah or Oregon.
Wake me up when Pac-12 leadership stops pretending academics is first, second, or third. Wake me up when they can sign a legit television contract... Rumor has it Larry Scott is still over at DirecTV working on things... 😂 (He was resign fired a few months back to those who don't know, and the possibly the worst major conference Commissioner ever.)
Yeah so? Two separate entities. The sports would bring in far far far more if leadership was competent. Instead the President's never leave the academics. They hire a loser like Larry Scott who effing robbed them of millions of dollars and they didn't even get a basic bytch deal out of ESPN for God's sake. We get Pac-12 after dark (We watching college basketball or Skinemax pron?) We get absolutely terrible slots for football unless game day is in town, because ESPN has zero reason to go to bat for Pac-12 sports. We get a handful of softball games though! We got a grand total of 1 baseball game this season... They show over 2200 games on their platforms!! We got 1.... Stanford @ UCLA because of Jackie Robinson day... Ooooweee!!! The Big Ten is a fantastic conference academically and they don't even have an embarrassment like Arizona State to bring it all down but they manage to be a really good athletics league on par with the ACC and close to the SEC. Both of those leagues are plenty good academically too. Truth is those 4 Cali schools hold all the cards and it's in their best interest (for now) to try and be the ivy league of the West. Which is nonsense because only they play at that level. There are other good schools in Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and Utah and middling school like Colorado and three terrible State schools that have a few decent programs on offer. It's time to get over the academics as a force in the sports sphere. They don't have to be married to one another in 2022.
@@theecharmingbilly for 1 viewership has been bad for pac even in primetime unless they play a game against a viewed team. And I get your point on losing out on some millions, but a University is 1 entity with departments. They will put more resources into increasing revenue where it makes more, and with many of them being tier 1 research athletics are literally scraps. Not that they aren't important, but creating a winning power 5 football team in consistency is hard to do, it's a win/revenue situation where research is the bread and butter and it's not close. My Utes had 1 donor in 1 year give what it took the football program to make in 2 years, and Utah made 55 million 2 years in a row. And I agree, the fan bases for the majority of the PAC suck! That is what hurts our conference, no fans, no administrative backing.
@@theecharmingbilly "The Big Ten is a fantastic conference academically and they don't even have an embarrassment like Arizona State to bring it all down" Well actually, the B1G has NEB, which according to the Altimore chart is well below AZSTATE in academics. Per same, ORSTATE is the worst in the PAC12 and L'VILLE is right with NEB (only slightly better in overall sports). In fact, per that chart AZSTATE is better academically than OR and WASTATE as well. It's that the PAC12 has more academic outliers than either the B1G or ACC that drops it to 3rd on that score. Nevertheless, if the PAC12 decides to abandon that part of its culture, I have no standing to say otherwise.
@@larrypilgrim12 "And I agree, the fan bases for the majority of the PAC suck! That is what hurts our conference, no fans, no administrative backing." Early in this story, I heard several PAC12 tubers and their guests discuss the long-term trend of waning interest in (at least) football in the PAC12 footprint or perhaps just the core California. It's been reported for some years now that the state would have negative population growth if it wasn't for foreign immigration, and these new residents aren't likely to watch a lot of American football. Can any amount of money or winning reverse this? Is this something the B1G would consider when evaluating expansion options? I suspect most who leave California head to AZ, NV, CO, TX or the Pacific NW, taking their interest in football with them.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
You called it Gold & Blue Dude!!
WVU ACC great fit!
Arizona, Arizona St & Utah, but I’d swap Memphis for Colorado.
That's fair
Usc and ucla wood never go to the sec
I think when SEC splits off the Big 12 will try to jump on board with them.
If one fails....it will be the big 12
I think they they should add Arizona, Arizona state, Utah and try to get Pittsburgh.
Arizona grad here. Arizona won't leave the PAC 12 because of the prestige of being associated with the California schools. They will let sports revenue tank to be associated with those schools.
Those California schools are leaving. 100% guarantee.
I'll copy/paste and earlier comment here. Perhaps you have some thoughts:
I think we can ignore the power gap between the existing "power" conferences for now, so that just leaves the growing revenue per team gap and how that may have long-term effects on competitiveness across all sports. Since I see no way for the PAC12 to get close to peer with the SEC & B1G in the foreseeable future, the $64K question is whether the PAC12 teams that could possibly leave for the B1G will so leave? Would adding a HOUSTON +1 (AAU or not) materially change these current realities?
@@ThatGuyz82 if that's the case, the Arizona schools will follow.
@@tarheel7406 lots of things up in the air right now like you said. There's also the 30-50 team mega conference talk. Im surprised the big 10 hasn't taken Oregon and USC. Maybe they asked too much in taking Oregon state and UCLA too? But there's also conversation that the CFP will naturally cause the realignment and that's what they are waiting for.
@@davidaz6622 "if that's the case, the Arizona schools will follow."
To where? If all of the California schools are leaving to the same place, it's to the B1G, which likely has no interest in the Arizona schools.
Money RULES the day. $$$. Nobody watching college football or basketball cares about a students GPA. The Big 12 needs to expand to at least 16 teams to survive. USC and Oregon to the Big 10 starts the chain reaction . Strike west Big 12 .We are the best league in basketball 🏀.
PAC12 adding Oklahoma State & Texas Tech make the most sense
They might. But they are not keeping those California teams much longer.
You say that like the PAC has better ratings/viewership than the Big 12.
Hint: They Don't
"PAC12 adding Oklahoma State & Texas Tech make the most sense"
But they didn't ~9 months ago, so apparently not enough sense. We have recent history folks. We don't have to guess unless there's a material change in circumstances.
@@tarheel7406 i think the new vommish just coming in the playoff espn monopoly fight and division were more likely the reason
Now all 3 are settled expamding into the midwes/ texas with pods for more eyeballs.
It does not make sense to PAC 12 leaders.
Regionally speaking, I think they both are fine. And as a Utah fan I have a bit of loyality to the PAC because they gave Utah their shot. B12 kicked out teams to the g5 who have never made it back. The pac has been stable, that's my opinion.
The Southwest Conference folded. Texas and Oklahoma convinced the Big Eight to expand to twelve teams. That left room for four additional schools in the Big 8. The new league was named the Big Xll. The four new schools were Texas, Texas Tech. Texas A&M and Baylor. The rest of the SWC were cut loose to go to other conferences. Texas immediately took over the Big Xll and began bullying the original Eight schools. Then Colorado. Nebraska, TexasA&M and Missouri got tired of the poop 💩 that Texas was force feeding them and left. TCU made back to the power 5 level. Houston was next and hopefully SMU will make it back eventually. I really don't see Rice ever getting back to the Power 5 level again. I've been around almost 68 years now. I still see things that floor me from time to time. Sorry if I can't give you more encouragement. Hang in there. Vaughn 🐯
And now Utah are Pac-12 Champs
@@davidmesser5813 Rice has as much of a chance as SMU does at this point.
@@davidmesser5813 Appreciate the history. It's my understanding that one of the main reasons the SWC failed was being almost exclusively Texas schools. Why should the new BIG12 expand and create similar risks?
@@tarheel7406 This is a good point...Baylor, TCU, Tech and Houston are enough Texas schools...the Pac has four California teams and they never talk about adding more CA teams...
big 12 better get boise state before the pac12
This is extremely stupid! Why would any PAC 12 school leave for the BIG12? The PAC12 has bigger TV markets than the BIG12 too
Disagreeing is fine but it's childish when you start saying stuff like that.. and as far as why?? Bc college football is CHANGING and schools are gonna go where they're gonna make the most money and have the BEST chances of making the playoffs..... it's not the 1980s,1990s or early 2000s anymore..
@@GoldBlueDude I apologize and I didn’t mean it like that
@@goingrawwithhuck3047 it's all good, I've heard WAY worse. Gotta have thick skin to do this..
This is why OU left the Big 12
This could actually happen but most likely it just emulates what the Big XII did after losing OU and UT. IF the Big I comes and takes UCLA, USC, UW and UO....then the Pac 12 could try to salvage itself with teams from the Big XII, Fresno, Boise, etc. or they could fold into the Big XII. So today's is the most feasible video you have made this month. :) Big Question is whether or not Big I is more interested in the West Coast or the East Coast. Your title could likewise be "Big XII or ACC puts the other out of business" if the Big I chose the East route of expansion.
Big 12 will not be able to raid the Pac 12 unless the Big I raids first. They would prefer to stay with the Pac 12. Big 12 could add 4 teams but not those listed. Boise, Memphis, USF, and East Carolina, Liberty, Marshall, North Dakota State, Montana, Hawaii, UAB, Ga. State, Ga. Southern, or teams of that ilk could certainly be in play but no way you are getting teams from the Big 4 unless the Big I raids either the ACC or the Pac 12. Just a splash of reality. But I do believe the Big I will raid one of those which is why it is interesting to see what that conference does...If they plan to raid the Pac 12 it will be rapidly upon us with the Pac 12 tv contract coming up. If they pass...it will show they are are eyeing ACC teams instead and will have to wait till mid 2030's due that conferences tv contract.
Only possible scenario is the Big 10 waits to see what the SEC gets with the OU/Tex addition. Then they pounce on 4-6 PAC 12 teams, namely USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, (maybe Cal and Stanford). If they only take the 2 LA teams, the PAC either stays put at 10 or grabs a few Big 12 teams. IF the big 10 takes 4-6 teams, then the Big 12 will be able to lure the AZ school, Utah, and Colorado. But that's the only way they get them is if the Big take the top 4-6 teams.
That's a risk, but not a terrible risk..
I suspect it the PAC12 would have to lose 5-6 for any remainders to leave, and then only if they decide to abandon the then outliers ORSTATE & WASTATE. The "PAC12" brand is just worth more and the new BIG12 keeps diluting itself.
Utah fan here! Love the content GB dude. I speak for most utah fans when I say we love the PAC. We’ve built rivalries and have built some great tradition here. Honestly, Houston would be a great add to the PAC in a few years. They are actively trying to attain AAU status which is heavily valued in the PAC. If they have a solid next couple years and achieve AAU status, I wouldn’t be shocked to see the PAC try to grab them and someone else.
I think we can ignore the power gap between the existing "power" conferences for now, so that just leaves the growing revenue per team gap and how that may have long-term effects on competitiveness across all sports. Since I see no way for the PAC12 to get close to peer with the SEC & B1G in the foreseeable future, the $64K question is whether the PAC12 teams that could possibly leave for the B1G will so leave? Would adding a HOUSTON +1 (AAU or not) materially changes these current realities?
Tar Heel who knows honestly, if they bring revenue they’ll be added. If USC and Oregon bounce we’re screwed regardless so…
Tar Heel I’ve always thought grabbing teams in Texas would be huge, but who knows from a revenue standpoint if it actually matters at all or not. PAC cares a lot more about the things most conferences don’t prioritize
@@alecseljaas8063 So far from experience PAC12 fans remind me of the WWI era Japanese Army vs. Navy. Isolated on the West Coast. The imperial Army trained at home, so it had little idea of its strengths and weaknesses. The Navy traveled the world to ports of call and was very aware.
Anyway, the PAC12 would likely change priorities if the biggest brands that drove those priorities leave. Largely due to more academic outliers, the PAC12 is already 3rd of the power conferences, and gutting the conference would leave those outliers as a larger percentage of the remainders. I suspect a depleted PAC12 would then just look at value and proximity for replacements.
Jason V I can without a doubt say… the feeling is mutual. I used to despise “arrogant nation” USC. But honestly, I’ve missed them and welcome it back
Arizona where I have lived for 78+years will not want the Big 12. Big 10 yes, but not Big 12.
To clarify the two schools receive 1.4 billion a year in research money partially due to PAC 12.
We love having the az school would be weird without you all.
The new Pac12 Commish is trying his best to satisfy usc to stay put in pac12 and keep the conference intact.
If he fails , all options will be wide open.
Dude … you crack me up 😂!!! Your opinion’s are way out there
Give me an example.
@@Kurdtscats the big8 raiding the pac
@@subgum3403 They could
@@Kurdtscats the moon could land on the earth too
PAC12 will add Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Kansas and houston.
LOL! You say that like the PAC has better ratings/viewership than the Big12.
Hint: They don't
@@bayoubull717 Yet are still are worth more on a per team average.
Gets more east coast freondly time slots.
@@tarheel7406 LOL! Tell me, how much more will each PAC member be worth when USC doesn't renew their PAC GOR....along with 1 to 3 other members?
@@bayoubull717 "Tell me, how much more will each PAC member be worth when USC doesn't renew their PAC GOR....along with 1 to 3 other members?"
That remains to be seen and assumes it will happen, yet I do know that losing 2-4 of one's best brands remains a smaller loss than losing 6-7.
Again, we know that the PAC12 currently distributes ~$40M per team annually and that the new BIG12 will be ~$20M based on professional general consensus.
At some point the Roman Empire contains more barbarians than Romans.
What you think may not what the college presidents want
That's true
USC and Oregon go to the Big 10. Then Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah join the Big 12. The other PAC 12 teams go to the Mountain West.
Good for the BIGXII but another sad domino falling.
Your problem is a PAC12 that loses "just" USC & OR remains more valuable and respected than the new BIG12 after it will have lost 6-7 of its best teams. I would also suspect that the then new PAC10 would stand pat and trust that UCLA, WASH & UTAH will rise to fill the power vacuum. It will take a much deeper PAC12 depletion to shake any remainders free.
I’m a BIGXII fan and your a PAC12 fan. Hopefully things calm down and there is no more realignment , but if teams go from one league to the other it’s PAC12 teams coming to the BIGXII cause the PAC12 doesn’t want any of the BIGXII teams. Lol 😆 Like I’ve posted on this video there’s around a 5% chance of this happening as is but if the B1G “accepts” a few of the PAC12’s top brands then the chances jumps to 50%. IMO
How would that work with the Time zone?
@@thunderousooner527 Airplanes
It depends on USC. If USC goes to the Big 10, then the PAC 12 is done. I am a big time USC fan calling for USC moving to the Big 10
This is the first I have heard of this happening
Oklahoma State and Baylor to the ACC just thinking out loud
Replacing what teams?
@@tarheel7406 not replacing adding
We all have brain farts from time to time.
@@justincooke9676 So an ACC that currently distributes ~$35-40M per team annually and desperately needs to catch up with the SEC & B1G in this regard should add teams from a conference with an estimated value of ~$20M per? Academic and geo outliers to boot? Is your goal to accelerate an ACC depletion?
PAC 12, if it expands to 16, will be interested in Houston, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, Kansas. They might be interested in Boise St, Iowa St, and Kansas St, but probably not enough academic clout to take a serious look a them. There are no other schools west of the Mississippi that would garner enough mutual interest for them to even consider.
If the PAC 12 wants to expand it needs to do so and soon, but with the upcoming TV deal, I doubt they will look to expand prior to that time. Unfortunately, I don't see the TV deal for the PAC12 amounting to much (I could be wrong), and if so, most schools will do a hard pass on any PAC 12 invite.
We have recent history and the PAC12 passed on all of the BIG12 remainders ~9 months ago.
A new thought does come to mind during this response though, as that decision was made when the Alliance formed, namely a proposed scheduling agreement. The B1G appears to now be refusing to go forward with that agreement. Would no agreement in the near future cause the PAC12 to reconsider expansion? Would no agreement cause some PAC12 teams to give up on the conference and leave?
Just as I think the B1G would only accept a 4-6 team bloc from the PAC12, I suspect the PAC12 would demand the same from the new BIG12.
Baylor is also R1 Carniege status now. Despite what the narrative is, the academics were the reason that BYU wasn't added previously. The PAC-12 seriously considered adding them in the 90's but their lack of high research status academically is what kept them from getting an invite. ISU was also AAU until a few weeks ago so them and KU are some of the highest "academically" ranking in the Big-12.
@@eujr4SC One must still put academics in relative perspective. The three Alliance conferences all have high average academic rankings. Looking again at the Tony Altimore chart, the five highest ranked new BIG12 schools are BYU, TCU, BAYLOR, IWSTATE & KANSAS. All of these would be fringe or outliers for the Alliance conferences.
@@tarheel7406 Very true. I would also add that I feel his academic rankings were a little flawed as he mostly focused on the US News report published every year. Which I think has a lot of good information I feel that some of the metric weights are a little off. I know we've had that discussion before. TCU and BYU get the benefit of being smaller private schools with higher retention and graduation rates which help in their academic USNWR standings. They're both still not R1 or AAU. His overall report was fascinating and a lot of which I knew and was interested in learning more about in comparing to other conferences. But putting it into perspective with all of his other categories again just adds more fuel to the fire on why the PAC has chosen not to expand, and I think in the end they will have the upper hand in future expansion plans if they really needed to.
LOL! Where did you buy your crystal ball and how much did it cost?
The Big 12 is already dead
Mizzou fan here. I like your ideas about adding from the Pac 12. I don't think Utah will come into the Big Xll. Colorado, Arizona and Arizona State are probable to coming into the Big Xll. Add Boise State to the Big Xll and you have a 5 team pod in the west. If Mizzou and Nebraska comes back to the Big Xll you have a 5 team Midwest pod with Iowa State, Kansas and Kansas State. South pod would be Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor and Houston. East pod West Virginia, Cincinnati, Memphis State, UCF and USF. I can see the Big 10 picking up USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington from the Pac 12. I can also see the Big 10 getting Virginia and Virginia Tech. Love the show Dude. Take care. Vaughn 🐯
Again, the B1G would not be interested in 2 teams from Virginia, much less the non-AAU VATECH. It will be UVA & UNC, two schools that the B1G has been trying to pull for some years now.
Anyone peddling Tater State to the Big 12 is completely delusional.
@@bayoubull717 Didn't Tater State beat Oklahoma a few years ago? 🤔 Vaughn 🐯
@@davidmesser5813 But they DIDN'T beat Oklahoma State.
@@richardmckinney4963 You're right about that. Take care my friend. Vaughn 🐯
Arizona is basically adding kansas lite to your conference
IMO, PAC could probably pic off at least 2 B12 teams, which I also mentioned OSU and Baylor a few weeks back but possible others. This is probably what happens provided all 12 PAC teams stay. If some bolt to the B10 or even say SEC which makes no sense then may be an argument that P12 teams do decide by where the better money is. How about thinking beyond which conference poaches who and the possibility that if some PAC teams do bolt that there might be just a complete merger of the PAC and B12? As much as I despise the thought of these mega "super conferences" that may be the way to go. I am just finding it hard to see expanding just to expand with G5 programs is adding any value.
I can see Big 12 pick off Arizona Arizona State Colorado and Utah make a 16 team conference.
a) Just as the B1G would want a 4-6 team PAC12 bloc, I suspect the PAC12 would want something similar from the new BIG12.
b) I doubt even a heavily depleted PAC12 would actually merge with the now depleted and diluted new B1G12. It would be a poach.
@@tarheel7406 That is a major point. B12 adding more G5 teams then thinking that would attract the Arizona schools, Utah and Colorado isn't happening, all that clump of mess does not scream big TV bucks. Should have just went with 2 adds for now.
Big XII will probably be the one that survives out of these two.
@Jason V Let's be fair, there's a difference between surviving roughly as is vs. as a legal entity.
a) If the PAC12 doesn't deplete to the B1G, both will likely survive as is.
b) If the PAC12 does so deplete, it depends on whether the P12 remainders abandon ORSTATE/WASTATE and scatter or they stick together and rebuild.
c) If they scatter, the PAC12 likely dies. If the stick together, they likely poach at least 4 from the new BIG12, and it lingers as an entity.
d) If the ACC and PAC12 deplete, then I suspect all remaining teams outside of the new B1G/SEC with any decent value go east or west to the surviving ACC/PAC12 to be distant Tier 2s, which would kill the new BIG12. i just don't see enough quality teams to support three Tier 2s.
e) If just the ACC depletes, we would have a similar outcome.
No way
Sure. And all the PAC schools drop to Div 2. Got it.
Pac12 is leaps above where the Big12 is Big12 has no blue bloods in football have nowhere near the money the Pac has
Right now at this point in time, the Big XII makes more money, now after Oklahoma and Texas leave, the PAC 12 and the Big XII get new TV deals within 5 years, that's when we'll see who's worth more money, but right now it's the Big XII...
@@GoldBlueDude the Big12 makes a bit more off tv deal but look at the total revenues for both conferences and it isn’t close at all. UCLA makes more money off one home game then any Big12 school. Plus look at donations to each school since Oklahoma St lost their huge donor it’s not even close anymore. Then you look at the money from apparel Pac12 is far ahead of Big12. If you add academics money into it the Pac12 is probably the 2nd strongest conference with the Big12 down in last
@@GoldBlueDude Overall Big 12 doesn't make more money than the PAC 12. The Big 12 distribute the money to 10 teams vs. 12 teams.
@@Alohanate2004 will you have factor in number of teams as well, each team in the Big XII makes more money than each team in the PAC 12..
@@jeffgrimm2955 These new BIG12 fans keep referencing the current media deal that includes TX/OK. The most common projection is down to ~$20M per team annually after they leave, and I've seen/heard as low as ~$10M. If the PAC12 lost just USC, it wouldn't lose half its media value.
You have to do a little bit more research my man. Arizona is definitely on the rise in football they signed some nice pieces in the class of 22’
Big 12 has to wait to see if USC and Oregon join the big 10, that’s when you pounce on the Arizona schools, Colorado and Utah. Memphis is the only other G5 would be worth it to add.
Or.......the big 12 could go on offense and push for USC, UCLA, OREGON, AND UTAH.....why wait for someone else to make your choices for you.....especially when you'd be left with a list that has the 2 Arizona schools.....their trash 🗑
1000000% agree
Boise is literally more worth it than Memphis my man. They're booth good pulls anyways.
@@koldonn1111 Nobody in the Big 12 actually wants Tater State due to their poor academic reputation, their gimmicky turf, and the lack of eyeballs.
The PAC12 can survive losing "just" USC & OR. The BIG12 would need both a heavy depletion and the remainders abandoning ORSTATE & WASTATE to have a chance at poaching any.
Option 4 would be best option for Memphis and Boise. As for USC, UCLA, Oregon or Washington going to the SEC...not happening.
Pac 12 wouldn’t want baylor cause they are a religious school
Which means they'll keep shooting themselves in the foot and the Big XII/ SEC/ BIG 10 will pick them apart...
@@GoldBlueDude Agreed. PAC12 is just plain dumb with some of their tactics.
@@GoldBlueDude They learned nothing from the BYU experience.
Uh
Not sure what way it will go if it does go one way or another. But as a BYU fan I would love to have BYU and Utah in the same conference again. It would bring back a lot more meaning in a rivalry that just hasn't been the same. Colorado makes sense given their location in relation to Big 12 country. The AZ schools would bring a big market and the Wildcats and Sun Devils can get better in football. Will it happen? I really don't know but time will tell.
SOME TALK AS IT THAT NEBRASKA AND COLORADO MAY BE LOOKING BACK TO BIG 12 SINCE TEXAS IS GONE… BIG 12 SHOULD GO AFTER THE FOLLOWING - AU ASU UCLA STANFORD CAL UTAH USC IF POSSIBLE… AND IF POSSIBLE NC VIRGINIA NSU DUKE FLORIDA STATE CLEMSON WVU CINCINNATI CFU BE A TRANSCONTINENTAL CONFERENCE BUT A ELITE ONE AT THAT…
Okay, take your bottle off the caps lock button, put it back in the cabinet, and go sleep it off.
The Pac 12 is here to stay. It is a Regional Conference supported by the biggest high school football state in the nation in California. The Big 12 is a little more amorphous. I hope it lasts, especially as a BYU Football guy.
I think this guy is wrong that the PAC 12 would get picked apart if the PAC 12 stayed the same. USC and Oregon is like Texas and OU in the Big 12
I love it when Syracuse plays WV 🤣
Schedule out of conference or vote to add after the ACC loses some teams.
@@tarheel7406 I only like playing them in the postseason tho..
Why is it that acc people thinks WV would bring nothing ..
They have no idea what they're talking about..
@@GoldBlueDude that may be but I never get from those that say this ever has a good reason .. And I can tell you a lot about 4 schools in North Carolina that I never went to but had very great patties out lol.. But the only thing I could ever agree they have is basketball and one hella Duke heart center hospital with a big industry park that brings those schools tons of money and to be honest is the only reason they are still a live .. Duke/ Carolina has the best top rate hospital even over Ohio states no joke ... They really don't have much going for them than that sorry .. I know I'll be cussed for this but it is true .. We do and have had a reall half decent basketball and football and well now baseball and shooting team to add the soccer team has even produced great success .. You will here way more about the guys sports in Carolina than girls .. We have some of the toughest gals in ours the big twelve really .. But anyway .. I just wonder you either hear we bring nothing or we are moutian hillbilliy racist I don't know .. West Virginia does bring many pros in to our house just to practice or train in our facilities you can bank on that to football and baseball in which we do have a professional team they pull players from that go to the majors .. Just as North North Carolina does ... So yea I'm not sure what we don't bring ..
@@backwoods7678 If you don't know by now (after ~9 months) why the ACC has no interest in WVU, then you likely never will.
For the record, UNC is the top all around sports school in the ACC and is one of only three schools to win the Director's Cup. Per the Tony Altimore chart, WVU would be at best average in all sports across all schools and near the bottom of the current ACC.
I'm getting old lol I want the simple hard hitting playing play or leave days back .. When you went to school got the education and played for that school that excepted you because they saw potential in you to help you grow .. Not pay what I'm not yet worth and I'll think about your school than . .. Everyone grows bout no one is so talented they are paid top dollar to be taught .. It takes years to grow billions for some and most that make it to nfl don't because they already grown before they get there .. Be a young adult for more years than a man when you know how to manage yourself without someone's help like you know the agents that promise them the golden life until you fall than your nobody with nothing asking for help you didn't need when you wore young .. I way more failures than success now than you did from the old days kids .. Whoops .. This why I need to stay off here lol .. My old man mouth just can't stay shut and yes I own my bussniss well the government does . .. Lmao .. As always appreciate everyone ..
@@tarheel7406 ok if you say so .. Lol
not to be insulting here, but the big 12 is basically the big east circa 2004. it's like a slightly bigger conference USA. outside of kansas basketball, there are no iconic brands in the conference. just a bunch of recently uplifted mid-majors. the pac 12 has several iconic brands. multiple schools that have won or at least played for national championships in the past 30 or so years. the pac 12 is certainly down right now, but they're still the bigger brand by far. if any absorbing happens, it'll be the pac 12 absorbing some of the big 12. the only way it goes the other direction, is if the big 10 raids the pac 12 first. if the big 10 were to take a few of those iconic brands, then big 12 would then be able to pick over the scraps. barring that, the pac 12 will not be losing out to the big 12.
These new BIG12 fans just don't get it. Everything you said is basically true. Even though the PAC12 is down competitively, it's still full of important flagships, big "little brothers", and top private schools. It continues to have its history/prestige and the respect of the other legacy power conferences.
@Jason V Mostly correct. If there's a consolidation down to two megas, it will go something like:
B1G adds a 6-team PAC12 bloc, UNC/UVA/ND +1
SEC adds CLEMSON, FSU, NCSTATE, VATECH +4
If MIAMI makes it, it will be part of the SEC +4
@Jason V I'll expand as well:
a) I suspect you are correct on the PAC-6, but I prefer to defer to the applicable fans and alumn of the B1G and PAC12.
b) From following the story since late July, I was surprised to learn that UVA/UNC came close to leaving for the BIG some years ago, but ultimately passed. I suspect that the current environment has changed things.
c) I've heard reports that there's already a legal strategy to deal with GOR, and I have many times offered my theories on what it might be.
d) I'm assuming that an ACC depleting of its best brands and further consolidation will make ND see the writing on the wall.
if jim delaney were still running the big 10, i think this trigger would've been pulled a long time ago. i think kevin warren lacks the experience and aggressiveness to have made this happen by now. it seems like he's getting there though. also as pointed out, there are legal barriers to overcome.
i think when the big 10 finally does makes its move, it's going to be seismic. i think they'll go for some combination of usc - the biggest prize out west, and ucla, washington, oregon and colorado. if they can find a way, possibly in conjunction with the sec, to raid the acc, i think they'll go for some combination of unc (and duke if that's a condition of getting unc), ga tech and virginia. the implosion of the pac 12 and acc would force notre dame's hand. i think whatever the big 10 does, they'll save at least one spot for the irish.
i think ideally, the big 10 would like to go both east and west. adding usc and notre dame would be texas/oklahoma huge, and several of those other schools would add great value to the conference. however it all shakes out, the college football world is probably going to look very different in the next 10 years or so.
incidentally, while i'm here. in regard to gbd's point about wvu to the acc, it's not the craziest idea out there. it kind of makes sense. if the acc starts feeling heat, they may go into survival mode, and gobble up any program they think can help them. wvu would not be a bad fit in that circumstance. geographically, they're a better fit than many of the other candidates they'd consider, and the mountaineers already have built rivalries in conference. 10 years ago, if someone had told me the big 10 will be adding maryland and flippin' rutgers, i'd have said that's crazy talk, but it happened. that addition to the big 10 was more out there than the idea of wvu to the acc.
@@brian_abn
"if jim delaney were still running the big 10, i think this trigger would've been pulled a long time ago."
It's my understanding that Delaney was the primary force to get UVA/UNC, but were politely rejected at that time. I also suspect those efforts were revisited prior to the MD/RUT additions.
"i think they'll go for some combination of usc - the biggest prize out west, and ucla, washington, oregon and colorado."
I'll let others debate as to who the PAC-6 will be. My only position is that it will likely only be 6 for a self-contained pod and that logistics/economies of scale will be considered. A more general consideration will be post-consolidation football potential. Consolidating down to only 48 teams that matter will have drastic effects on the survivors in recruiting alone, as some teams will have their traditional regional rivals downgraded. I will say that CO could be a 7th PAC pull since geo its close enough to existing B1G members.
"i think whatever the big 10 does, they'll save at least one spot for the irish."
Maybe. If the ultimate plan is two 24-team mega conferences, there will be a last call. If The B1G gets its PAC-6, UNC & UVA, that leaves +2. If ND holds out, that +2 will be filled. In the end, 48 of the best teams will have a broad and deep national following that wouldn't really need ND.
"f the acc starts feeling heat, they may go into survival mode, and gobble up any program they think can help them. wvu would not be a bad fit in that circumstance."
Yeah, you are suffering from GBD logic. If one's conference is suffering flight risks due to the revenue deficit with the B1G/SEC, one doesn't make the revenue gap worse. The only logic perhaps would be to pack the ACC with more schools with no options for the SEC/B1G in the hopes of making escape harder. Yes, the percentage of teams wanting to leave lowers, but the strength of the legal challenge on grounds increases. In a perverse way, UVA/UNC may be hoping WVU is added over their objections.
triple. colorado, utah, arizona, arizona st.
The Big 12 should STOP dilly dallying around and be pro active and GET Colorado, Arizona and Arizona State RIGHT NOW. Forget about the Boise States And Memphis of the world. Good stadiums and fan bases. Maybe then, the Pitts and VPIs would want to join us
And by what feasible means would the new BIG12 pull CO, AZ & AZSTATE without a prior PAC12 depletion? What intangibles are to be gained at the cost of less revenue? Less prestige?
@@tarheel7406 so you think their is more prestige with Memphis and Boise? Hardly! I would even question the move to add central Florida and maybe Cincinnati ( at least before or minus Luke Fickell) anyway. IF the big 12 became more aggressive maybe it would force the NCAA to do their job and bring this conference musical chairs to and end. They won’t! Too much high dollar influence with ESPN and sports agents to make THAT happen. SO.... Big 12 get off your butt and at least TRY to pluck off the better apples on a tree and widen the boundaries of your league before its GONE
@@josephthomas4513 Let me rephrase:
And by what feasible means would the new BIG12 pull CO, AZ & AZSTATE without a prior PAC12 depletion? What intangibles are to be gained by those three schools by joining the BIG12 at the cost of less revenue? Less prestige?
If I was BIG XII. I would try to go for one of Arizona school & one of California School as to 2 target. Then Colorado & Boise St.
I think San Diego State and either Colorado or Utah would be a good combo as well..
Big 12 and TCU next to an real airport, an international one and huge market. That’s what tv and conferences really want now.
I’m seeing a lot of people who have NO IDEA what they’re talking about here. The PAC 12 just had their worst year in their history from a lot of perspectives thanks to probably the most incompetent football commissioner in CFB’s history. He is now gone, half of the conference is trending up, WE HAVE THE BLUE BLOOD(S) not the big 12. The PAC cares more about the things other conferences don’t. Academics, Olympic sports, etc… and they all have strong relationships with the other universities. I’d say USC were to leave they would demand UCLA come with, same with Arizona schools and Nor. Cal schools. The new TV deals will open the eyes of many who have no idea what they’re talking about currently. The big 12 would be lucky to get near what the pac 12 will get. Anyone saying the PAC will dissolve is blind.
I try and objectively defend the PAC12, but its fans need to get a better handle on where the conference currently stands relative to the other "power" conferences:
a) Last season isn't the issue; it is now years of little to no top level success in the revenue sports.
b) The other Alliance conferences also care about academics and non-revenue sports. From following this story, among the P5 the PAC12 is the top dog in Olympic sports but is 3rd academically and 5th in top level revenue sport competition.
c) In market value per team, I'd estimate the PAC12 to be 4th.
If you think the top PAC12 brands aren't flight risks to a B1G which generates more revenue per team, has highly competitive revenue and non-revenue sports, and has a higher average academic ranking, then call me blind.
Tar Heel I think it’s surely a possibility. Do I think it’s a probable possibility? No I don’t. Like I said many universities won’t separate from each other which makes things difficult, also the PAC doesn’t prioritize football, they find revenue from other places. I don’t think any team would leave simply for football. I also think USC enjoys being the top dog, In the big 10 they’d become one of 4/5 top dogs
@@alecseljaas8063 "Do I think it’s a probable possibility? No"
Okay, I always defer to PAC12 fans/alumn if the claim is reasonable enough and reconciles with other facts. If the PAC12 stands pat, as I can't see it expand just to expand, then I can just see the ACC depleting to the B1G and SEC, likely to ~20 teams each. The football playoffs likely won't be closed, but perhaps 2 autos each to the SEC & B1G and 1 auto to the PAC12 plus some at larges. ND will likely remain indy and drop its ACC association, having to find a new home for its non-football sports.
Tier 1: SEC & B1G
Tier 2: PAC12
Tier 3: New BIG12 and new ACC
G5s
8-Team playoff with 2-2-1 autobids and 3 at large invites. Likely no per conference cap.
Tar Heel I can’t see a situation where a conference gets two auto bids even in a situation like that… and honestly I think the B1G and SEC would be fine with that knowing they’d get most of the at large’s anyways
Pac will expand now that division are gone
Great video. The Big 12 seems to be more proactive and I think more attractive. My guess is that the Big 12 KEEPS WV and adds Boise State and Memphis.
Tater State has a better shot at the PAC than the Big 12.
The Big 12 is waiting to poach PAC and ACC schools.
a) WVU has no other P5 to go
b) Expanding more is just additional unnecessary dilution at this point
My opinion is B12 may be being to proactive and may find itself in a situation it can't back out of if a better idea comes up. They should have just added 2 teams to replace the 2 leaving, then sat on that for now to see what happens. You are not seeing PAC12 on any tear to adding g5 programs and diluting the conference. While I see a lot of comments on the great job B12 is doing, I can't help suspect they are shooting themselves in the foot. The only way B12 attracts Utah, Arizona schools and Colorado is if the PAC splits and some go B10 and there is no additions to add that add value to the conference, but the B12 would have to show how they would benefit in a conference that has loaded up on G5 programs and how that garners big tv revenue. Not to mention PAC brings Rose Bowl. Take a step back and ask yourself again, why is that more attractive?
@@ckstaff I completely concur. Back in Aug I suggested (I rarely say what a party should do) that the BIG12 expand just enough to stay viable and then wait and see if any future PAC12 or ACC remainders become available. It was always going to be harder for the new BIG12 to poach but diluting almost guarantees being poached if it comes to that.
If you pick the right terms to add they won't necesarily be viewed as a G5 team. Look at TCU does anybody see them as a G5 school. Look at Cincinnati and Houston, just because they are coming from à G5 conférence, does anybody see them as G5 schools ? I think they out grew their conférence and deserve to be P5 teams.
I think the Big 10 will decide the fate of the PAC 12 and Big 12. When the Big 10 expands, that could kill either one of those conferences.
I really don’t see any of this happening but if I had to pick of what you are offering, I’d say Colorado and Utah.
The PAC 12 share revenue equally among it's members. That's why no PAC 12 school will leave and it's why the PAC 12 did not accept Texas and OU 5 years ago. Texas wanted to keep all the revenue to themselves and not share it with the PAC 12 schools.
PAC 12 owns the west coast so I don't see it going away anytime.
That's not at all what happened. The PAC was going to go to 16 and add CU, Texas, OU, Okie State, Texas A&M Texas Tech. But Texas A&M was eyeing the SEC where they originally wanted to go when the SWC folded. Then A&M and Mizzou got an invite to the SEC. The Big-12 wanted to replace A&M with Baylor but the PAC-12 wanted to invite Utah as a replacement. Baylor threatened to go to the Texas state legislature to prevent Texas and Tech from leaving without them. So the entire deal fell through and Texas and OU created an uneven revenue generation model for the Big-12 and allowed Texas to create the LHN. But with Baylor now having R1 Carniege Status and Houston trying to make a push for AAU, the PAC can have more options in the future. It won't be a big splash like adding Texas and OU like they wanted to do in 2010, but it would pretty much cripple the Big-12. It won't be the other way around though.
@@eujr4SC Loved the history here.
👀 oops
Ever see the movie "Hot Tub Time Machine?" Remember the guy who is missing an arm?
The Big 12 can fold or can live... but those California teams ain't staying in the PAC. They just aren't, and nothing will keep them from leaving for the B1G.
So the California teams aren't staying in the PAC but they're not leaving for the B1G. So where are they going?
@@eujr4SC The Big is where they would go if they left the Pac
@@eujr4SC read that again. The grammar is correct.
@@ThatGuyz82 My bad. I need to stop reading comments on my phone and just wait till I get on my laptop. 😂
I would like to see asu sun devils in the big12 but hey that's me
The PAC 12 should have grabbed BYU, Oklahoma St, Baylor, and Texas Tech. The hole Tier 1 and no religion attitude isn’t helping. Notre Dame isn’t a research university or AAU and the PAC 12 or B10 wouldn’t hesitate in accepting them.
There was a reason that the PAC12 didn't expand ~9 months ago and that window hasn't really closed.
As for ND, it's a high academic school with top all around sports and a blue in football. Just checked the Tony Altimore chart for a quick reference, and no other nonaffiliated school is like that. The schools most similar in academics and all sports are WASH, CAL, UNC, UCLA, MICH & USC per that chart. I see no new BIG12 even close, the closest being a distant BYU.
Baylor is now a Tier 1.
@@toddevans4691 yeah…..that should open the door for Baylor. Baylor vs. Oregon, USC, and Utah, those would be some entertaining games. Especially if you add BYU as well.
Unfortunately they have to get over their hang up with religion. (Except for Notre Dame, they get the exemption).
@@tarheel7406 Oh yeah…. Notre Dame’s academics are high. It’s like an Ivy League school of the Midwest. Which is why the B10 and PAC 12 wouldn’t have an issue with AAU membership or being a religious school.
Not to mention the great athletics.
@Jason V "There is no scenario where Baylor or BYU ever get invited into the Pac."
Unless and perhaps by chance the PAC12 needs a +1 to get ND? It wouldn't be in the PAC12's best interest?
I think geography and all the stupid political drama of Cali... both give the edge to the Big12 over the Pac12. I think the Pac12 will lose USC, Oregon and maybe Washington and UCLA to the big conferences with the big money. I doubt the SEC will expand their footprint that far, when they could just stay regional and add FSU and Clemson instead. So I could easily see the B1G add USC, Oregon and Washington as a partner if they can also land Notre Dame. If they can't get Notre Dame, then maybe they add Washington with UCLA.
The point is, the Pac12 has programs with massive brands and massive appeal for the B1G to poach... so they will lose their premiere programs.
Once that happens, the Pac12 will be in a bad situation... and NO ONE from any P5 is going to be tempted to join them... quite the opposite. The Big12 will swoop in and grab those 4 schools that you mentioned: Zona, ASU, Utah and Colorado. No one will want the Cali political drama of Cal or Stanford, and no one is really interested in Oregon State or Wazzou. So those remaining schools will probably join the Mountain West, and try to convince the world that the new Mountain West is deserving of a P5 status. Or maybe they keep the Pac12 name, and add the best of the Mountain West and American conferences... either way... they will become G5 level at best. I think adding schools in the Mountain time zone to the Big12 will be a bonus for the conference, but it could be enough for WVU to want to bolt, as they will be so far out in the east. If they do bolt, then I could see the addition of Memphis becoming a reality for the Big12.
Maybe only due to tv markets, not necessarily on the field. Yes losing the LA market with SC and most likely UCLA because the B10 wants the LA market and not split it with the PAC. Yes that would put a dent on a new PAC tv deal. Not sure adding Mountain west or any G5 programs fixes that. I don't buy B10 wants SC and UCLA, they want the LA market more. I have yet to see a good reason why the B10 would be interested in Oregon or any other PAC school unless they want a Pacific division and if that were the case would need more than 4 schools to do that. Which makes me lean more towards the PAC12 stays as is, maybe even attempt to lure a couple of B12 schools if needed to get a TV deal they want.
Pac12 is not very smart it will not take Baylor because it is a religious school. I think the Big12 waits and sees if the SEC or Big10 take any teams.
Tbh bro if rich Rodriguez never left west Virginia y'all probably would of had 1 or 2 Natty's I mean the culture he built there was phenomenal
Why would the AZ schools, Utah, and CO want to add extensive travel to their schedules?
All the CA schools, OR schools, and WA schools are in the same time zone, so the AUC schools will give that up to have to play in 2 other times zones that doesn’t even include their own.
The reason for the mountain time zone teams of the PAC12 to move to the New BIGXVI would be to gain access to the central and eastern time zones for occasional games and a league with better access to the CFP. This probably has a 5% chance of happening on its own and a 50% chance if any PAC12 teams leave the league first for the money of the B1G. Utah and CU are a better blind fit in the BIGXII.
Unless somehow the BIG12 could offer $10M more per team than the PAC12 I don’t see it happening. The only Conference I could see any PAC12 school leaving to join is the B1G and SEC.
LA, SF, Oakland, Portland, Seattle are better markets combined than Dallas, Houston, and Orlando.
The BIG12 would be better off waiting for the 2 Power Conferences to form and trying to consolidate leftovers.
The BIG12 should just add the 3 Service Academies and Memphis.
@@jeffwatson68 "The reason for the mountain time zone teams of the PAC12 to move to the New BIGXVI would be to gain access to the central and eastern time zones for occasional games and a league with better access to the CFP."
a) Why buy games in other time zones when one can rent by scheduling ooc games?
b) If the PAC12 is so weak in football, why would moving to the new BIG12 increase CFP chances?
Only real teams in the PAC 12 footprint that are decent are Boise St., SDSU & ??? Maybe Utah State, Colo St., UNLV or Nevada (if not grabbing any Big 12 teams), but they have some serious questions.
Not grabbing UNLV and Vegas is a major blunder. I don't care that the school is booty. Help them build a better institution by having them mingle.
@@theecharmingbilly There is always that thought given the Vegas market, unfortunately UNLV has always been absolutely terrible in football. They've poured in a ton of resources into that program for decades & they have been consistently bad, even in just the Mountain West Conference.
@@fanman71 totally agree, underachieve like crazy and they're not good academically but the Pac-12 can help foster all of that while gaining the single most important market outside of the P5 footprint. It's more important than an already boomed San Diego and Boise is a nice city but it's never gonna touch Vegas. Memphis is a great city with all sorts of history but it too is tapped. Vegas is still a baby in a lot of respects.
The Big XII and SEC would be be hitting the Pac-12 hard by obtaining it. UNLV doesn't even have to be a juggernaut in sports. It offers a ton outside of UNLV.
Of course the Walnut Creek crew wants to keep playing grabass with the 4 snickering mean girls in LA/Bay Area. Getting nothing done for its Athletic Departments or its Athletes.
The Pac-12 should be headquartered in Vegas years ago already.
@@theecharmingbilly I agree that the P12 HQ should've been in Vegas & not Walnut Creek. Equidistant from all the programs w/ a lot of hotels & flights in & out everyday. I just wonder if now, even w/ Allegiant Stadium are they ever going to be good. And as w/ SDSU & Boise St there is always the academic ranking question mark, but there has to be some level of desperation in the PAC 12, that like you said unfortunately I don't think they have right now.
Big12 took a good step forward when the picked up the four new teams - four of the best from G5. All four bring good things and are investing in their athletic program. The Pac12 might follow the same path by going after some good regional G5 programs who are likely to make the financial commitment to improve. Teams like San Diego State, Utah State, UNLV. I don't think that raiding other P5 conferences is the answer and I also think that the Pac12 and Big12 will be around for quite some time. But then again, the Southwest Conference died, so who knows?
I don't think so. The PAC 12 has always been extreme selective about who can enter the PAC 12. They are not as open house as the Big 12. Still, I think their hands will get forced because USC and Oregon will join the Big 10. They will have no choice but to open up that conference to many like the Big 12 did
A step forward.....lol....your new tv contract won't show that
@@scotthamilton3314 Interesting since they haven't signed a new TV contract deal yet. 🤔🤔. Seems like you know what others don't. Lol
@@danielbitzer652 .....I sure do
@@scotthamilton3314 That's good so what deals and amounts are being offered to the PAC 12. Break it down?
I guarantee the Big 12 dissolves. Texas Tech Kansas State Oklahoma State TCU all will come to the Pac-12. There will be too many eyes on SC games. It will be too appealing for those big 12 teams not to go out west because no one will be watching the big 12 when OU and Texas leave
Boise State plays BYU every year and beats them 2 to 1 to date.
I have to say Big XII. Especially with the Mike Gundy comment.
If the PAC 12 was smart they should have got BYU and Boise when they had the chance. Boise is a huge market now….
They are still out there, no? As far as I'm aware, no new GOR has been signed for the new BIG12.
It's a growing market but it's not "huge," as they are only ranked 100 out of all markets. San Diego, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, and even Fresno are way bigger.
Not as big as huston or dallas...
I think it is more likely ACC adds West Virginia for a 15-team league...
I also think PAC could swipe Houston/ TCU/ Tx Tech & Oklahoma St...
The ol fact Kansas fits in B1G or SEC makes sense as well long term...
XII could wind up (depending how viewed) as AAC/ WAC type league...
"I think it is more likely ACC adds West Virginia for a 15-team league..."
More likely than what? That aliens arrive with free clean energy and world peace? There is next to zero chance that the ACC adds WVU to its existing members. It may consider WVU as a replacement.
@@tarheel7406 Lousiville (academics) disagrees with you...
@@kopp0e541 L'VILLE was a must add compromise invite. The ACC is not in a must add situation. It is in a must add high value member situation. An exception does not a new rule make. Why is this so hard for so many to understand. Dating a 5 doesn't mean one must date a 4.
Yiu need to reverse it.... pac taking bog8
Big 12 wins
The BIG 12
What makes you think the pc12 teams are unhappy? Your content and sources can’t be other UA-cam channels with no resources either lol people want to break up the oc12 so bad lol don’t forget it was the pc12 who was trying to create a super conference first. Thr big12 is only attractive for group of 5 teams West Virginia just makes no sense in the big12
@Jason V I suspect that Bowlsby believed (or perhaps was advised) that the only way the new BIG12 would possibly get an autobid is with a 12-team playoff (5 of 12). I doubt that there will be more than 4 autos in an 8-team format, and which current "power" was going to be voted out?
@Jason V
a) I haven't considered how the new BIG12 expansions have hurt the remaining de facto P4, but your arguments are interesting. In short, the same reasons FSU/MIAMI (and by extension the ACC) wouldn't want to invite UCF are the same reasons they didn't want to see UCF added by any "power" conference. The shop is actually closed but the new BIG12 is trying to get some in the backdoor.
b) One can see this in how the prior and current BIG12 backfills all think they are now peers with the traditional schools that have always mattered.
c) I stated that when Bowlsby resigned, one of the reasons was because he had no respect from his peers after getting played by the SEC and almost messed up the playoff expansion. The TX/OK leak stopped it for now.
d) I don't think that the B1G has a lot of faith in Warren. It's the biggest bear in the Alliance, yet Phillips seems to be the lead on the CFP expansion concerns and now the PAC12 is the first to drop divisions.
e) I had earlier thought that the Alliance could possibly get a per conference cap and an 8-team playoff in exchange for a BIG12 auto, but your position is that the four legacy conferences are united in locking the B12 out.
These BIG12 fans don't seem to get it. A conference can't lose 6-7 of its best members and then dilute itself and expect to be treated as a peer. (I've been using "dilute" for some time now. Interesting to read the same term here.) Yes, there will be a period of years where some on field success will remain, but over time these movements will tell.
Well, let's remember that our teams will be survivors. I try to be objective and truthful without grave dancing.
@Jason V why would they agree to 12 team play off are you really ok with getting only 1 team in and watch the sec get 5 in every year. As a big12 fan you will only g RT one seat at the play off table and Texas and Oklahoma will still have a play off seat with a 12 team format. It’s a reason the sec doesn’t want auto bids for the new format. So realistically a 12 team format will give everybody else a better shot at the play offs. The sec is only getting harder a 2-3 lost sec team will not get in over a 1 loss conference champ
@Jason V A lot in the last comment. (BTW, you have no idea how refreshing it is to have an exchange with a sane, knowledgeable, etc. person in this venue.)
a) It's been claimed that the NCAA designates which are the "power" (lay term) conferences. I suspect the NCAA would respect the demands of the surviving de facto "powers" and revise, but even if not, I would think the de factos could just name the conferences which get an auto when the new playoff is expanded by agreement.
b) No further consolidation of the remaining "powers" is really required, but that would require some revenue sharing at some "league" level. Without that, the chase for more revenue per team will cause that consolidation.
c) I'm not sure anti-trust concerns come into play if the survivors decide to have their own exclusive playoff. No legal benefits are granted, just bragging rights. All of these power conferences are already exclusive. The problems will likely occur when trying to implement parity rules (e.g. NIL eligibility that would come close to a salary cap). That's more of an initial thoughts thing.
d) My position on the Alliance was that it was created during the early chaos. I think it was to keep the PAC12 from making panic expansions and prematurely asking for B1G invites, to provide the B1G with allies for the playoff fight, and to keep the ACC from quickly scattering (resulting in an even more buffed SEC).
e) You may poo-poo the proposed scheduling agreement, but I saw some real potential in creating value by sharing big brand wealth. (I've used a molecule sharing electrons as an analogy.) Both the PAC12 and ACC need to increase their per team revenue, and a binding scheduling agreement could have closed some of the gap. I now believe that the B1G determined that the P12 and ACC boats would have risen more (but not higher) than theirs, so they've backed out.
f) Frankly, I see no reason to keep the basketball challenge with the B1G if they can't return the favor. I never anticipated all teams would get an Alliance game, just the top ~ 4 finishers from the prior year. If the ACC depletes, a lot more members will be looking to land in a mega SEC than in the B1G, so perhaps building ties there now would be prudent. I also can't see why the PAC12 and ACC can't just have their own football scheduling agreement. UNC really enjoyed its last trip out west to play USC.
@@tarheel7406 no divisions opens up expanding into the midwest/texas snd a lot more east coast eyeballs.
Pac12
Arizona State, Stanford & UCLA WILL LEAVE the PAC-12, possibly ARIZONA and UTAH as well!
ASU will 'cause they are NOT valued by the PAC-12 like OREGON & USC.
Where will they all be going?
@@tarheel7406 Arizona State to SEC... (I'll take off my tinfoil hat & hang up now)...
@Jason V "Do you know anything about how prestigious academic institutions work?"
Under which rock have you been living? No, they have no idea. They think the B1G will drop its AAU requirement. They think the ACC will take the statewide community college of WVU. They think the BIG12 can pull a number of teams from the PAC12 and ACC without any prior departures from these conferences.
There is no unifying academic culture in the BIG12, so it's disposable for the slightest reason.
@Jason V NOT UNLESS USC & Oregon bolts and by the way the PAC-12 is a FUCKIN' JOKE: STAT FACTS - - the PAC-12 has NEVER GONE to College Football Playoff SINCE 2016 (Since Washington GOT THEIR ASSES handed to them by ALABAMA just like ANY WACK-12 team) & OKLAHOMA has been to the playoff MORE than the WACK-12 combine. @Jason V maybe YOUR league should MERGE with the IVY LEAGUE, tsk tsk tsk!
Okay this is what you are missing about Colorado. Culturally the university fits more in the PAC 12. About 10-15% of Colorado students are from California. Approximately 3x alumni base in PAC 12 states vs Big 12 states. So being in PAC 12 improves fundraising over Big 12. In addition, money still better P12 with UT and OU leaving. Also, historically Colorado recruited more in California than in Texas. This might be changing over the next decade. There has to be a big issue event like USC leaving to the B1G.
Good and relevant info regarding CO. Illustrates how GBD thinks backwards. He constantly predicts and wants WVU to go to the ACC, including because that's where the fans and alumn are. On the other hand, he fails to consider things like that for other schools. I call these concerns intangibles.
As a comparison, where the alumn live is one of the intangible reasons PSU would consider a move to the ACC. It's been asserted that more PSU alumn live in Florida and the Carolinas (serparately) than live in the entire B1G footprint outside of PA. Losing or gaining intangibles really affects the calculations.
It’s been this way for a while even when Colorado was in the big 12
It’s interesting you talk about big 12 and PAC12, because I feel big 12 is 3rd best P5 conference. PAC12 and ACC are awful.
Feelings are nice and help us get through the day, but perception isn't actually reality. Measured by estimated average market value per team and top level on field/court success (weighting towards value), the new BIG12 is unquestionably the 5th best "power" conference. Through in academics, prestige of its members, etc., and the difference is even greater.
The B12 is the only conference to have never won a playoff game and are now losing their two biggest teams.
@@Georgeavocados Losing their two biggest brands after already losing 4-5 of their bigger brands. I don't get satisfaction by gratuitously pounding on the new B1G12, but pushing back on senseless assertions is another matter.
@@tarheel7406 Conferences with a 1st round pick last year: SEC, B10, ACC, PAC12, AAC, Missouri Valley, Southern
Conferences without a first round pick last year: Big 12
@@Georgeavocados Yes, but one year isn't that determinative, especially re: draft picks. Claiming that the new BIG12 deserves to maintain "power" status is defensible, especially when compared to the relatively recent PAC12, but claiming more than that (i.e. 3rd best of 5) doesn't hold up to scrutiny. No harm in making a false boast unless it causes harm by not considering reality when making plans for the future.
Man if the pac 12 goes down then what ?
That would not look good for USC
I say the PAC 12 survives and thrives. They have a monopoly on every major west coast city and they have been together for decades. (Colorado and Utah 10 years). They also have blue blood program in USC.
The new Big 12 may be in trouble. When 1/3 of your conference are group of 5 schools that really hurts the value of the media deal and makes those schools much more vulnerable.
Those Blue Bloods are not long for the PAC12. They will be leaving.
Last season alone, many of group of 5 schools walked all over the PAC schools. There are some schools, like Boise, who are group of 5, but have been huge upset games over power 5 schools. This is their chance to finally step up to that level they’ve been at for years.
The new Big 12 just added the defacto PAC champs. If anything, the PACs failure to bring in BYU spelled the beginning of the end for the conference.
@@bayoubull717 Since 2011 (a good sample size) BYU is 6-15 vs the PAC 12. One good year doesn't mean much.
Uh osu kansas actually any of the big8 would join the pac.
The Pac-12 has several things working against it, but they do have, depending how you define your terms, several bluebloods.
PAC 12 should wait 5+ years then after Texas and OU struggle in SEC invite them. Doubt it would work the money will be two good in SEC. That said I expect the PAC 12 to do better than Big 12 with new media contracts.
OU will be fine in the SEC.
@@Kurdtscats you can't say the same for Texas. 😂🤣😂
@@ThatGuyz82 fax
Big 12 will win what WVU we need more teams for travel that’s why we need to head to the ACC
Add Memphis and Louisville to the Big 12
@@alaneren9296 right also Pitt and Virginia tech
@@JGlizzy-br9fx And how exactly will the new BIG12 feasibly pull L'VILLE, PITT & VATECH? What intangibles are gained to counter the loss in revenue and prestige?
Kansas and Notre Dame to the Atlantic Coast Conference folks 👀
Doubt enough value to keep the ACC from depleting. Moreover, the UNC-KANSAS ties are likely much weaker than they once were, and KU is just too much of a geo outlier. The ACC needs to improve the football product; it's just fine in basketball. UCONN likely has a better shot as a +1.
LOL! You say that like people give a shit about KU.
hint: nobody does.
Let's circle back to option 3 for a second.....would someone please tell me why in every video that talks about who the big 12 should go after do they always bring up the 2 Arizona school.....their trash 🗑.....in the last 20 years has either one of them won a national championship.....played in a national championship.....won a BCS/new years 6 game.....played in a BCS/new years 6 game.....won the pac 12.....played in the pac 12 championship game.....has either team finished at least 2nd in the pac 12 south lol.....if your going to swing then go for the head.....stop asking for those 2 and start pushing up on USC & UCLA.....and while your at it toss out the vote for Colorado and go balls out for Oregon....you just said that they need name brand schools, and you overlooked what it is that your asking for
Just stop it. Given how the BIG12 has been depleted of its best 6-7 teams and has already diluted itself by added G5 members, the PAC12 either stands pat or (if it loses 4-6 teams) poaches the best of the BIG12 remainders. The only way the new BIG12 pulls any PAC12 remainders (i.e. post depletion) is if ORSTATE and WASTATE are abandoned as then outliers.
@@tarheel7406 I disagree with you.....the pac 12 can only stay alive if it's able to keep USC....truthfully USC could go independent if they wanted to and would miss a beat....how about you reread my post and understand that it was a response to GB dudes number 3 option....it's not about me wishing for anything...it's just be objective and if the big 10 was looking to make a move for pac 12 teams then why shouldn't the big 12 try to beat them to the punch....have a nice day
@@johnteill_
a) The PAC12 can survive if it loses USC. It has enough brands, history, prestige and respect from the other "powers". Again, the BIG12 has lost 6-7 of its best schools, not just TX/OK.
b) The new BIG12 will never beat out the B1G for any school they both want. Doubtful any future PAC12 remainder (e.g. AZ) will leave until a PAC12 depletion is certain.
@@tarheel7406 why do you keep saying 6-7 only six schools have left the conference so how could they have lost 7 of their best also two of those schools were Colorado and Missouri they are not big brands at all hell TCU has more history/tradition than either of those two. The big 12 has lost its 4 best brands though being Oklahoma, Texas, Texas a&m, and Nebraska. But I'm the field production three of those teams aren't worth squat. A&m won the big 12 once in it's early years and hasn't done anything since then Texas used to be really good but since 09 they haven't done anything Nebraska has been garbage since even before they left the big 12 only Oklahoma is worth a shit on the field
@@tarheel7406 HAHAHAHAH. If the PAC 12 loses USC, it can forget about being a Power 5. They're one of the few big brands in the conference. I'll put it like this. If USC leaves, the PAC12 leaves relevancy. Especially if they lose another team with it like Utah or Oregon.
Wake me up when Pac-12 leadership stops pretending academics is first, second, or third. Wake me up when they can sign a legit television contract...
Rumor has it Larry Scott is still over at DirecTV working on things... 😂
(He was resign fired a few months back to those who don't know, and the possibly the worst major conference Commissioner ever.)
Academics bring more money than athletics for many pac schools. And it's not even close.
Yeah so? Two separate entities. The sports would bring in far far far more if leadership was competent. Instead the President's never leave the academics. They hire a loser like Larry Scott who effing robbed them of millions of dollars and they didn't even get a basic bytch deal out of ESPN for God's sake. We get Pac-12 after dark (We watching college basketball or Skinemax pron?) We get absolutely terrible slots for football unless game day is in town, because ESPN has zero reason to go to bat for Pac-12 sports.
We get a handful of softball games though!
We got a grand total of 1 baseball game this season... They show over 2200 games on their platforms!! We got 1.... Stanford @ UCLA because of Jackie Robinson day... Ooooweee!!!
The Big Ten is a fantastic conference academically and they don't even have an embarrassment like Arizona State to bring it all down but they manage to be a really good athletics league on par with the ACC and close to the SEC. Both of those leagues are plenty good academically too.
Truth is those 4 Cali schools hold all the cards and it's in their best interest (for now) to try and be the ivy league of the West. Which is nonsense because only they play at that level. There are other good schools in Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and Utah and middling school like Colorado and three terrible State schools that have a few decent programs on offer.
It's time to get over the academics as a force in the sports sphere. They don't have to be married to one another in 2022.
@@theecharmingbilly for 1 viewership has been bad for pac even in primetime unless they play a game against a viewed team. And I get your point on losing out on some millions, but a University is 1 entity with departments. They will put more resources into increasing revenue where it makes more, and with many of them being tier 1 research athletics are literally scraps. Not that they aren't important, but creating a winning power 5 football team in consistency is hard to do, it's a win/revenue situation where research is the bread and butter and it's not close. My Utes had 1 donor in 1 year give what it took the football program to make in 2 years, and Utah made 55 million 2 years in a row. And I agree, the fan bases for the majority of the PAC suck! That is what hurts our conference, no fans, no administrative backing.
@@theecharmingbilly "The Big Ten is a fantastic conference academically and they don't even have an embarrassment like Arizona State to bring it all down"
Well actually, the B1G has NEB, which according to the Altimore chart is well below AZSTATE in academics. Per same, ORSTATE is the worst in the PAC12 and L'VILLE is right with NEB (only slightly better in overall sports). In fact, per that chart AZSTATE is better academically than OR and WASTATE as well.
It's that the PAC12 has more academic outliers than either the B1G or ACC that drops it to 3rd on that score. Nevertheless, if the PAC12 decides to abandon that part of its culture, I have no standing to say otherwise.
@@larrypilgrim12 "And I agree, the fan bases for the majority of the PAC suck! That is what hurts our conference, no fans, no administrative backing."
Early in this story, I heard several PAC12 tubers and their guests discuss the long-term trend of waning interest in (at least) football in the PAC12 footprint or perhaps just the core California. It's been reported for some years now that the state would have negative population growth if it wasn't for foreign immigration, and these new residents aren't likely to watch a lot of American football. Can any amount of money or winning reverse this? Is this something the B1G would consider when evaluating expansion options?
I suspect most who leave California head to AZ, NV, CO, TX or the Pacific NW, taking their interest in football with them.
Boomer Sooner!!!!!!!