Pac-4 on the offensive?

[Webmaster]

Oliver Luck (father of Andrew Luck and former AD of West Virginia and former XFL commissioner) is reportedly starting the process of working on what teams should be added to the PAC 4 from the American and the Mountain. A list of about 12 teams will be reviewed. This DOES NOT mean a partnership or merger is off the table it just means they have a process in place

https://www.si.com/college/stanford/football/oliver-luck-reportedly-determining-expansion-candidates-for-the-pac-12

[ROCKNEPONY]

article in San Diego Tribune about pac expansion:

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sp ... u-be-worth

[Webmaster]

Pretty interesting story / research. It looks at various scenarios of the Pac-4 joining, merging or rebuilding. Using their math, the most lucrative option for SMU would be joining a rebuilt Pac-10ish.

"The American has a lengthy deal with ESPN — it lasts into the 2030s — that spins off an average of $7.5 million per year (approximately) to each campus. Any school jumping to the rebuilt Pac-12 would see an increase of about 50 percent annually under the highest valuation estimate."

So, not P4 money, but a significant bump over the G5 conferences.

[SMUguy]

I like Scenario 2 in that San Diego story, and Scenario 3 even more.

People will raise the issue of the travel cost, especially for non-revenue teams, but that margin would be more than covered by the 50 percent bump Webmaster mentions.

[mtrout]

The whole "teams travel" problem is not as pervasive as people think.
Which teams actually HAVE to travel during the regular season to compete against conference opponents?
Golf- no
Rowing- no
Swimming- no
Cross Country- no
Track- no
Equestrian- no. ('conference' won't change)

Tennis- kinda

Football- yes
Basketball- yes
Soccer- yes
Volleyball-yes

[Water Pony]

I'm not sure about the projected value in any of the options.

I agree it would be a modest and helpful increase to $10m for SMU, but perhaps unacceptable to Stanford and Cal from where they are now. For Oregon State and Washington State, the dramatic decrease may be acceptable since the current payout for MWC, their likely alternative, is $4+m.

The option may be acceptable to SMU but Stanford and Cal's athletic budgets would take a big hit.

[Water Pony]

The whole "teams travel" problem is not as pervasive as people think.
Which teams actually HAVE to travel during the regular season to compete against conference opponents?
Golf- no
Rowing- no
Swimming- no
Cross Country- no
Track- no
Equestrian- no. ('conference' won't change)

Tennis- kinda

Football- yes
Basketball- yes
Soccer- yes
Volleyball-yes

I don't get that no travel will be necessary for SMU. For example, Stanford and Cal meets, games, and events for swimming, rowing, track, etc. would require travel on alternative years at a minimum. If OSU, WSU, and SDSU (if included) would expect the same, so annual travel is likely.

[mtrout]

I don't get that no travel will be necessary for SMU. For example, Stanford and Cal meets, games, and events for swimming, rowing, track, etc. would require travel on alternative years at a minimum. If OSU, WSU, and SDSU (if included) would expect the same, so annual travel is likely.

Right. Annual travel. Big deal.

[Dukie]

I don't get that no travel will be necessary for SMU. For example, Stanford and Cal meets, games, and events for swimming, rowing, track, etc. would require travel on alternative years at a minimum. If OSU, WSU, and SDSU (if included) would expect the same, so annual travel is likely.

Right. Annual travel. Big deal.

Sorry, how much worse is a new PAC versus the current state? USF and ECU and Navy are not next door, and virtually everything in our current conference is a guaranteed plane ride except UNT, Tulsa, Rice, and UTSA.

[FroggieFever]

The whole "teams travel" problem is not as pervasive as people think.
Which teams actually HAVE to travel during the regular season to compete against conference opponents?
Golf- no
Rowing- no
Swimming- no
Cross Country- no
Track- no
Equestrian- no. ('conference' won't change)

Tennis- kinda

Football- yes
Basketball- yes
Soccer- yes
Volleyball-yes

Bingo.

[Water Pony]

If the ACC can’t decide on adding Stanford, Cal, and perhaps SMU, the remaining PAC-12 schools may pivot to rebuilding the PAC-12 in two steps. First, 4 AAC schools in 2024 and then a year later, 4 MWC schools. 4 schools in three geographic pods: West, Mountain, and East.

https://www.sportskeeda.com/college-foo ... ns-reports

I like the ACC possibility for us, but this alternative works for me too. The East group would be SMU, Memphis, Tulane, and USF.

[Insane_Pony_Posse]

Oregon State AD says their "best option" is rebuilding the "Pac-12" but will have to wait on media rights

August 20, 2023

Story by Sean Keeley •

The demise of the Pac-12 seemed to happen in slow motion over the last couple of years before it completely imploded in a hurry earlier this month.

After USC and UCLA announced they were bolting for the Big Ten, the conference dragged its feet on a new media deal, eventually presenting something that seemed wholly unappealing to most member schools. That opened the door for Colorado to leave for the Big 12, where they were eventually joined by Arizona, Arizona State, and Utah. By the time Oregon and Washington announced their intentions to join the Big Ten as well, the Pac-12 was officially dead as we know it.

Not so fast, says Oregon State AD Scott Barnes.

“For us, our priority, again, is keeping the Pac-12,” Barnes told The Athletic last week. “We think it’s in the best interest of our student-athletes and our fans to build back the Pac-12. We have inserted ourselves in every conceivable conversation, every feasible conversation at the Power 5 level. And I would say that our best option is rebuilding the Pac-12.

“Obviously, (Group of 5) options are out there. But that’s not our priority.”

Barnes noted that OSU is working closely with Washington State, Cal, and Stanford on what happens next, though it’s worth noting that both Cal and Stanford have been heavily rumored as heading to the ACC along with SMU.

In order to get in a position to even consider a new media deal, whatever that looks like, the “Pac-4” would need to expand in a hurry. And right now, there’s not much to discuss with potential media partners.

“We’re going to wait till we have more answers on the things I’ve mentioned,” Barnes said when asked if they’d be speaking with network executives. “The assets we retain. The membership that we have. And then immediately move to that phase.”

The AD is very realistic about how whatever kind of media rights deal is ahead for him and the other remaining Pac-12 schools, it’s not going to be much.

“Whatever those (media rights) dollars are, the reality is they’ll likely be less than what we’re making currently,” he said. “Now, that could grow over time. But we could be likely dealing with less annual revenue from all aspects of conference revenue streams. So we’ve got to be prepared to fill those gaps.”

Barnes adds on multiple occasions that the conference mates will “know very soon” about what the next steps are. To be fair, people around the Pac-12 have been saying something similar for the last two years, and that hasn’t worked out great as of yet.

[The Athletic]

[Water Pony]

Monday Morning Musings:

While SMU watches and waits what its options for conference affiliation might be, I have been looking for what has to happen for us to be in a position to move or not move. Whether we remain in the AAC in 2024 or get invited to either the ACC or a rebuild PAC, SMU's fate is initially out of our hands until something breaks. Will ACC choose to expand or will the remaining P4 schools bet on themselves and rebuild?

What should be our key decision-making criteria as my enthusiasm to remain in the AAC long term is low?

For me the simplest criteria is to follow Stanford, unless they go independent. If we align with the Stanford Cardinal we will place ourselves with one of the premier universities in the world and perhaps with Cal, which is the most prestigious public university in the country.

It matters because of their brands and the positive reflection on SMU for affiliating with these two universities. I admired Oregon State as well, but would follow Stanford to the ACC, if offered membership which excluded OSU and WSU.

Either an expanded PAC with further additions such as Tulane, etc. or an ACC invitation are great outcomes for SMU. Either opportunity would tie us to Stanford, which would mean a great deal long term for SMU and Dallas. It would improve our academic image and desirability as a destination. And, athletically, we would be in a P4 or stronger G5 Conference for all sports.

[EastStang]

I was okay with the AAC even after the defections by UCF, Cincy and Houston. It was the backfill that caused me to lose all respect for the conference. UNT, Florida Atlantic, UNCC were bad additions in my view. UTSA, UAB, and Rice all had some bona fides to bring them in and we have some history with Rice and UAB. I can see ECU wanted UNCC for travel partner. I can see USF wanting Florida Atlantic as a travel partner. But who wanted UNT? I'd have picked So. Miss., UTEP, La. Tech over them. Or Air Force, Boise State, Fresno State, UNLV. But I digress, we watered down our conference more than we needed to. We lost three. We should have added just three.

[Charleston Pony]

I was okay with the AAC even after the defections by UCF, Cincy and Houston. It was the backfill that caused me to lose all respect for the conference. UNT, Florida Atlantic, UNCC were bad additions in my view. UTSA, UAB, and Rice all had some bona fides to bring them in and we have some history with Rice and UAB. I can see ECU wanted UNCC for travel partner. I can see USF wanting Florida Atlantic as a travel partner. But who wanted UNT? I'd have picked So. Miss., UTEP, La. Tech over them. Or Air Force, Boise State, Fresno State, UNLV. But I digress, we watered down our conference more than we needed to. We lost three. We should have added just three.

I think Aresco was probably recognizing there could be further defections and was being aggressive expanding to 14 schools. He also recommended schools in major metro areas and clearly looked at potential vs what they may have accomplished recently.