PonyFans.com

Water Pony wrote:First, this is good for college FB. Beyond expanding the number of teams and guaranteeing one G5 champion an automatic slot, it may slow the rush to the P2 for some PAC12 and perhaps ACC schools. The decision means a conference championship is a more likely path to the CFPs, e.g., OR and WA. Stability is needed against the predatory behavior of the BiG10. With GoR in the ACC, the SEC will defer for a long time expanding again.

The prospect of some stability for the next 5-7 years gives the PAC12 (10) and its schools a reason to stay together. And, this means expansion of 2 or 4 schools greater likelihood of happening. And, that means San Diego State and at least be one more school will be added in the near term.

The PAC may well decide to remain at just 10 schools. They could play 9 conference games to determine their champion and still have 3 non-conference games. They will have to weigh the financial benefit/risk of adding 2 more teams to preserve a championship game and the revenue derived from that game...or they could do what the Big XII has been doing for years and have #1 play #2 to determine their champion. In any given year, it is at least possible (although certainly not likely) both their champion and runner up could get bids to the playoffs

PlanoStang wrote:Remains to be seen who will be regarded the P6 conference. PAC12 may go after a lot of MWC teams in a desperate attempt to save itself if need be. AAC, and MWC might fight over some of the orphans.

The "p6" conference will be the one with the highest rated champion. The PAC 12, for instance, may wind up with a lower rated champ than the AAC, MWC or Sun Belt.

Topper wrote:

PlanoStang wrote:Remains to be seen who will be regarded the P6 conference. PAC12 may go after a lot of MWC teams in a desperate attempt to save itself if need be. AAC, and MWC might fight over some of the orphans.

The "p6" conference will be the one with the highest rated champion. The PAC 12, for instance, may wind up with a lower rated champ than the AAC, MWC or Sun Belt.

And the problem is that the strength of the G5 conference (top to bottom) will affect the ranking of those conference champions so if SMU's future is to be playing in a weaker AAC, it will be really important to schedule P5 teams in your non-conference schedule. This year's TCU and Maryland games are a good start but we might not be able to schedule home games vs FCS/Southland opponents starting in 2026

Recapping College Football Playoff implications:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footb ... the-sport/

Here are the implications:
- every conference championship game of every conference now matters
- PAC 12 will have to expand to not only keep a conference championship game, but also to ensure there are enough quality teams that if an upset happens in their championship game, they will still get a bid.
- The PAC 12, Big 12, and ACC are no longer in a battle for survival.
- At some point in the next couple of years, there will be a big push to get the best teams from "the rest" into a true P6 conference. There is simply too much money available to not make that happen. After that happens, there will basically be a first division and second division.

Some of the allure of the PAC 12 adding SMU has gone down, because they no longer are in the need to access recruiting grounds. The amount of expansion the PAC 12 does will be determined by if they really thing UW and OU are really threats to leave.

That said, this also means the PAC 12 isn't in a fight for survival anymore. Which means there is virtually now chance of them adding schools that don't fit their academics or culture. So UNLV, Boise St, and Memphis for example, are no longer options.

JasonB wrote:Here are the implications:
- every conference championship game of every conference now matters
- PAC 12 will have to expand to not only keep a conference championship game, but also to ensure there are enough quality teams that if an upset happens in their championship game, they will still get a bid.
- The PAC 12, Big 12, and ACC are no longer in a battle for survival.
- At some point in the next couple of years, there will be a big push to get the best teams from "the rest" into a true P6 conference. There is simply too much money available to not make that happen. After that happens, there will basically be a first division and second division.

Some of the allure of the PAC 12 adding SMU has gone down, because they no longer are in the need to access recruiting grounds. The amount of expansion the PAC 12 does will be determined by if they really thing UW and OU are really threats to leave.

That said, this also means the PAC 12 isn't in a fight for survival anymore. Which means there is virtually now chance of them adding schools that don't fit their academics or culture. So UNLV, Boise St, and Memphis for example, are no longer options.

I think the rules changed such that they no longer need 12 to have a championship game, but I’m also not following you on why the recruiting-ground allure is gone for the PAC and Texas?

Check out this 2024 playoff projection. 1st round - SMU at ND.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/i ... tournament

Dukie wrote:

JasonB wrote:Here are the implications:
- every conference championship game of every conference now matters
- PAC 12 will have to expand to not only keep a conference championship game, but also to ensure there are enough quality teams that if an upset happens in their championship game, they will still get a bid.
- The PAC 12, Big 12, and ACC are no longer in a battle for survival.
- At some point in the next couple of years, there will be a big push to get the best teams from "the rest" into a true P6 conference. There is simply too much money available to not make that happen. After that happens, there will basically be a first division and second division.

Some of the allure of the PAC 12 adding SMU has gone down, because they no longer are in the need to access recruiting grounds. The amount of expansion the PAC 12 does will be determined by if they really thing UW and OU are really threats to leave.

That said, this also means the PAC 12 isn't in a fight for survival anymore. Which means there is virtually now chance of them adding schools that don't fit their academics or culture. So UNLV, Boise St, and Memphis for example, are no longer options.

I think the rules changed such that they no longer need 12 to have a championship game, but I’m also not following you on why the recruiting-ground allure is gone for the PAC and Texas?

They need to expand to make sure that they have enough quality teams that both teams in the championship game are ranked, so regardless of the outcome someone gets into the playoffs.

Getting into Texas and recruit was a priority when there were a limited number of playoff spots and the Big 12, ACC, and Pac 12 were fighting for survival. Now that the fight to survive is off, they just need to be good enough to be one of the top 6 conferences to get a playoff spot. They don't need a Texas recruiting pipeline to do that.

JasonB, I understand they may not need a Texas recruiting pipeline, but it wouldn't hurt. More importantly, having games in the Central Time Zone would help their media window/game times and expand the brand east.

In an ideal world, there would two CT teams.

Water Pony wrote:JasonB, I understand they may not need a Texas recruiting pipeline, but it wouldn't hurt. More importantly, having games in the Central Time Zone would help their media window/game times and expand the brand east.

In an ideal world, there would two CT teams.

This is where I am too, though I agree with everything else in JasonB's post. Their recruiting pipeline in Southern California is about to be constricted, whether they add SDSU or not. They would be well served to get a foothold in any other recruiting hotbed that they can, and SMU/Texas is the only one really available.

Webmaster wrote:The Athletic is reporting that the College Football Playoff Board of Managers has unanimously approved the 12-team playoff format.

6 highest-ranked conference champions + 6 highest-ranked at-large teams.

Very good news for SMU as well as our Power6 conference.

Does the 12-team playoff format increase the likelihood that we have a better shot at being in the playoff as AAC champs than we would by joining a more competitive conference?

I bet most of us would rather be in a P5 conference for the $$$. But if football “success” has been redefined as making the playoff, are we arguably a more attractive destination for recruits/transfers–and for other sports and academics, as well–if we make the playoff consistently? (And could we keep a good staff if we do?)

Does SMU’s overall fund raising success and endowment also benefit? In other words, does the exposure and the trickle-down effects of being in a playoff more frequently translate into more success for SMU, as a whole?

(Don’t interpret this to mean that we couldn’t finish atop a P-5 conference.)

JasonB wrote:Here are the implications:
- At some point in the next couple of years, there will be a big push to get the best teams from "the rest" into a true P6 conference. There is simply too much money available to not make that happen. After that happens, there will basically be a first division and second division.

That was my main take-away from this announcement. This will drive to a true P6 landscape. Second, the bottom 1/2 to the bottom 3rd of that new P6 needs to concern themselves with having the highest rated conference champion. Therefore teams with the ability to finish consistently in the Top 20 or so will be in higher demand.

So as always, just win baby!!