PonyFans.com

Water Pony wrote:Today's Dallas Morning News:

It asked the questions on the costs to SMU and other risks.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb ... r-AA188l64

I hate the DMN. Any risks of us moving to the PAC12 are substantially less than the risks of us staying in a conference with UTSA, North Texas and Charlotte.

Something is definitely about to be announced. Colorado board of regents meeting today.

https://www.heartlandcollegesports.com/ ... s-heat-up/

Since they’re a public university the meetings are public except executive session. I wonder if the others regents are meeting today. The pac 12 had their meeting yesterday.

NO info on the meeting yesterday. I suspect if this drags on for another week or two the PAC12 will lose some of its schools. IMO Colorado is ready to bolt and that may be the tip of the iceberg. Obviously the b12 wants to destroy the PAC in order to move up to the number 4 conference.

Colorado will be good until Coach prime jumps to the SEC. He’s gonna be challenging Saban in a few years.

The Big XII is spreading lots of chatter. Is it real or not, who knows? There are a lot of unknowns if they bolt. Will the TV contract for the Big XII get bigger? Or will it stay static and they just agreed to feed more mouths with less going into their pockets. Will defectors be paid a premium for joining the Big XII? Or will they have to pay a huge entrance fee? Who would bolt and who would stay? The names mentioned by the trolls are ASU, AZ, and CO. UT would be blackballed by BYU according to these same trolls. That would leave OR, OSU WA, WSU, UT, Stanford, CA. Not a bad group to join. The only fear is that Stanford, OR and WA leave to the Big Ten. But the Big Ten isn't ready to split their pot further with those schools per news reports. ESPN needs Pacific time zone programming with interesting matchups. Not Fresno State vs. Utah State. They want name schools playing. Apple and Amazon would like to move into College sports as well. Its a complicated deal with lots of players. This is in the hands of the TV suits. If they tell the Big XII, add all the schools you want, but your TV contract isn't getting any bigger, that will stop expansion in it tracks.

Here is a good podcast from Billy Embody (On the Pony Express) that talks about this week's Pac12 meetings, expansion, etc. I think he represents the state of affairs quite accurately. I would recommend you subscribe to his Youtube channel as well as it has lots of great information on player insights, team strengths/weaknesses, etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUBW4AWqh4

East- what is real is that Co. execs are meeting today. Who knows what the topics will be. I agree that the TV suits will be calling the shots but not sure how that will turn out for the PAC12. IMO they are not valuing the PAC very high. Perhaps a short term (3-4 yrs) agreement would work for all concerned.

redpony wrote:East- what is real is that Co. execs are meeting today. Who knows what the topics will be. I agree that the TV suits will be calling the shots but not sure how that will turn out for the PAC12. IMO they are not valuing the PAC very high. Perhaps a short term (3-4 yrs) agreement would work for all concerned.

Three facts are unquestionable: Oregon and Washington want a Big 10 invite. The payout in that conference is likely to be 2/3 greater than anything they will get in the PAC. Second, neither school has received a Big 10 invite. Third, those two schools are unlikely to want any media deal with a lifespan of more than 3 or 4 years as that time frame gives them more options if the invite is forthcoming.

Who would you rather play CAL or UTSA? Stanford or UNT? Utah or UAB? Quite frankly, I don't see any Big XII schools really wanting to join what's left of the Big XII unless there is no other option.

Topper wrote:

redpony wrote:East- what is real is that Co. execs are meeting today. Who knows what the topics will be. I agree that the TV suits will be calling the shots but not sure how that will turn out for the PAC12. IMO they are not valuing the PAC very high. Perhaps a short term (3-4 yrs) agreement would work for all concerned.

Three facts are unquestionable: Oregon and Washington want a Big 10 invite. The payout in that conference is likely to be 2/3 greater than anything they will get in the PAC. Second, neither school has received a Big 10 invite. Third, those two schools are unlikely to want any media deal with a lifespan of more than 3 or 4 years as that time frame gives them more options if the invite is forthcoming.

I think Amazon and/or Apple is a longer term play to reap its benefits. I don't see the Pac signing any agreement less than 5/6 years which would still expire prior to both the B1G's and B12's agreements. Luckily, we will all know soon enough!

The ACC pact might help the PAC, but probably won't satisfy Clemson and FSU. They would love to bolt to the SEC. Not sure the SEC would let them in. South Carolina probably wouldn't want Clemson in the same conference and UF wouldn't want FSU in their conference. They might recruit enough teams to block them. On the other hand it would dagger the ACC. Clemson and FSU are the divas of the ACC in football like UT and OU were the divas of the Big XII. Of course the ACC would be really smart to add a team in Dallas and Houston so that Clemson and FSU could recruit there.

EastStang wrote:The ACC pact might help the PAC, but probably won't satisfy Clemson and FSU. They would love to bolt to the SEC. Not sure the SEC would let them in. South Carolina probably wouldn't want Clemson in the same conference and UF wouldn't want FSU in their conference. They might recruit enough teams to block them. On the other hand it would dagger the ACC. Clemson and FSU are the divas of the ACC in football like UT and OU were the divas of the Big XII. Of course the ACC would be really smart to add a team in Dallas and Houston so that Clemson and FSU could recruit there.

Texas A&M thought that they had an agreement to keep UT out of the SEC and look at what good it did them. Money money money.

Not to mention Florida vs FSU and Clemson vs S. Carolina are already great rivalry games being played every year despite those schools being in different conferences. The renewal of the Texas vs Texas A&M will be good for the SEC as well as their having Texas vs OU

Charleston Pony wrote:Not to mention Florida vs FSU and Clemson vs S. Carolina are already great rivalry games being played every year despite those schools being in different conferences. The renewal of the Texas vs Texas A&M will be good for the SEC as well as their having Texas vs OU

Yes, and arguably Arkansas will be in an enhanced position in their Texas recruiting. Arkansas can make any rivalry a bitter one and for so many years their game with UT was one of the biggest of the season for both teams. As a fan I'm glad to see it resume.