[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

I've seen the Big12 rumors, but I could have sworn that the pro-rata was all tapped out. Adding 4 more is $124m more a year. 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

21 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

OR St and Wazzou would add more football exposure to the AAC than it has ever received. I am confident more money will be there. You're adding millions and millions and millions of more eyeballs to the late night time slots. West coast football fans will tune in. Snatching SDSU and ________ will dictate more PST eyeballs. 

Hopefully we see some leaked figures soon. I'm not as confident that ESPN is willing to shell out the money needed to entice them, I hope they do because that would be great for us, but they just spent a pretty penny paying for all of those schools in the Big12 and possibly the ACC. 

[AAC and MWC Pitching PAC for Expansion]

2 hours ago, chrisfisher said:

Sorry. Not keeping up with every post in that mega thread. It's that simple as to why a separate thread title. 

You need to read every post in a thread to throw up a simple headline and start talking about it? 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

39 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Exposure = eyeballs = money. The AAC will be able to get more in the current format and/or a restructured format than the MWC. 

That is the question isn't it? How much money? It all depends on how much Aresco can convince ESPN to fork over. How do we even know ESPN is willing to give additional shares for either school? While I agree that the AAC has the better deal and exposure we are making lots of assumptions as to where/if more money would come. 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

1 hour ago, ColoradoEagle said:

The payouts aren't the same; AAC pays significantly more than MWC for the base contract. No idea whether or not that would go up with the signing of those two (plus potentially more).

For exposure, there's this thought with some MWC fans that they have more games on linear TV than the AAC. While technically true, AAC games are on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU. The vast majority of MWC games are on CBSSN, and as we all know from Judy's mess, that's a channel roughly 14 people subscribe to.

I was posting under the assumption that either Fox or the MWC would get them a deal that would match the AAC. Either by media payout or other conference concessions. The MWC deal runs out in 2026, so anything they do short term won't affect them for too long. 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

3 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Their incentive is exposure. Don't believe that's a big deal ask the pac12. 

Agree, but is that enough of a reason to choose the AAC if the payouts are the same? Those two have a lot of bills to pay. 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

11 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

We could see a situation where whichever conference gets OSU and WSU goes after 2-4 teams from the conference that didn't get them.

Possible, but again it's all about the money. Our focus as fans is sports and schools, but I think we have to think about it from the media side. ESPN was going to lose the pacific/mountain timezone to Apple, so with the Big12 they get the mountain slots back with BYU, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and Arizona St. If Stanford/Cal go to the ACC that's 2 schools for pacific coverage. Fox has the Big10, the MWC, and shares the Big12. There comes a point where you have no more slots that need filling, so you don't have any reason to spend more money. 

[AAC and MWC Pitching PAC for Expansion]

21 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

Simple solution. Not to be an ass, but don't open it if you're not interested

947+ replies on the other thread. Information has become too mixed, IMO. 

How is having everything about the same topic in 1 place not better? This way fragments the same conversation across various threads. It's redundant *and inefficient. 

[AAC and MWC Pitching PAC for Expansion]

Already being discussed here:

 

Why does every headline need a new thread?

 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

7 minutes ago, greenminer said:

I believe AAC has the leverage here with money, AND we have Aresco.

I don't claim to know all the stuff going on, but it seems like the MWC is facing an uphill battle here.

The MWC has geography on their side. Less money spent on travel, and easier integration. If they can get an offer from Fox to match the $7m the two would get from the AAC what is their incentive to move east? If you read the article it mentions the Navarez is meeting in person, while Aresco is meeting virtually. I don't think there is a more perfect way to illustrate the geography aspect. The AAC has to offer enough money for it to make sense for the PAC2. 

[Looks like ACC about to add SMUt Cal and Stanford]

2 hours ago, DentonStang said:

We were cheated by the UT- enforcement complex angry that we were successful and targeted because we are small and private.  The Pharaoh demanded we be killed, and now we have wandered the desert for 40 years. But finally we are, perhaps, reaching the promised land and have our chance.  

You describe us like we.have power,.but in football we are the salt of the earth.  The every man. You should be supporting us as we show that it is still possible to bootstrap yourself up in the conference game, not side with our big state school oppressors.  We are just giving unto Caesar what is Caesars. 

Isn't the 7 year term poetic?

Wait, so your analogy is that you were the slaves, but had enough money to pay to become a Pharaoh and be the slavers instead? 

 

 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

Really it's in the hands of ESPN. What can Aresco do if they aren't willing to pay for the additions or bump up the payouts so the move is attractive to the two? 

[Looks like ACC about to add SMUt Cal and Stanford]

2 hours ago, wardly said:

Hawaii plays football in the MWC, all other sports in the Big West.

Right, but the Big West doesn't sponsor football. So there's no conflict with them playing football in the MWC. 

[Looks like ACC about to add SMUt Cal and Stanford]

It's funny how all of the SMU posters come crawling out from the floorboards. Where were you all during the PAC12 extravaganza?  I remember so many of you posting all the time at the beginning and then for some reason stopped? 

[Looks like ACC about to add SMUt Cal and Stanford]

11 hours ago, NT80 said:

As we are seeing, $$ can get you things now, and new rules made.  If Stanford wants to park it's volleyball team in the WCC but not basketball, watch it happen.  And the WCC would be happy to have Stanford in ANY sport.

That just seems like it would open a huge can of worms. You couldn't stop any team from having teams across multiple conferences. 

[Looks like ACC about to add SMUt Cal and Stanford]

17 minutes ago, MeanGreenTeeth said:

I thought we established that you had to play the sports that your conference sponsors.  Are the any conferences that sponsor everything other than football and basketball?  Surely not.

I'd have to look it up, but I was certain I saw that you can't split sports between conferences. If the conference you are in sponsors that sport, you must play in that conference. For example Cal could put fb in the ACC and the rest of it's sports in the WCC since the WCC doesn't sponsor football. However it cannot put bb in the ACC while keeping the rest in the WCC since they do sponsor bb. 

As for your question I don't think a conference like that exists. 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

What's important to WSU

https://news.wsu.edu/news/2023/08/22/wsu-athletics-advisory-committee-to-review-conference-affiliation-options/

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

4 minutes ago, NT80 said:

This needs to happen.  Eliminate the Pac rebuilding, squish Smu's dreams, and get OSU and WSU into the AAC....then start the football season! 

If only the two are left it's going to come down to who can offer the most $$$. Fox vs Apple Vs ESPN. ESPN offers $7m in the AAC, will they be willing to bump that up with those 2 as the only additions? Fox offers $4m in the MWC, if they can match what they AAC gives what's the motivation to move further east and add to travel expenses? If Apple is really wanting to get into the cfb market would they still offer a deal of a rebuilt PAC and how much? I don't think Fox or ESPN would cannibalize their assets by offering a deal to rebuild the PAC. 

[PAC 12 Realignment Talk Mega Thread (All 12 threads merged)]

 

[Oregon State demanding 17.5 million to accept ACC merge?]

Why are you giving a random twitter poster the authority to speak for an entire university?

[Stone Earle Named Starter]

I think it's a good message to send. Hard work and being hungry will be rewarded. Putting Rodgers out there would have been the safe option that everyone would have expected, so I have to give it to the staff for having a fair and open shot at being QB1. 

[Stone Earle Named Starter]

5 minutes ago, Cr1028 said:

I feel like Stone forced their hand but they feel obligated to also play Rogers because they convinced him to transfer here thinking he would win the job easily.

Agree. 

[Stone Earle Named Starter]

Sounds like both guys did enough in practice with Earle getting the advantage. The question is can either guy perform the same under the lights? Seems like the coaches want to see both under real game conditions. 

[What is your favorite North Texas helmet in all of history]

I liked the green full SOW ones. I also liked the version with just the feathers, particularly the chrome one. 

 

*sidenote, IIRC I don't think people liked these grey jerseys but they looked really sharp. 

[4 teams from AAC agree to leave?]

25 minutes ago, NT80 said:

So in other words, they are willing to wait before telling Stanford they need to decide if they are in or out?  Sounds like they are waiting on Stanford (to decide if they are in or out).  Lol.

I do think the ACC will make a decision this week if any one (1) school has changed their vote (ie been swayed, convinced, bought) or not about adding new members.

Haha yes, but they are waiting by choice is what I am trying to say. They are choosing to wait, not being forced to wait by Stanford. They aren't going to give up the monetary gain of having Stanford in a conference with them. WSU/OSU/CAL have the ability to do something now if they really wanted to, that's a 3-1 vote on any action. @Arkstfan put it perfectly:

8 hours ago, Arkstfan said:

That takes us back to Washington State. Why would you leap today for options that are still there tomorrow when waiting may mean finding a way to keep Stanford?