PonyFans.com

rodrod5 wrote:Boise is highly unlikely with Cal and Stanford. Even if they can get past "the academics" there is still the fact that Boise feast on California recruits. Part of the reason they are able to do that is players that actually want to get out of an area like Oakland or LA to go to school. Second is players that are not going to college to "play school" and are going there to play sports. Third is players from places in the valley that want to go come place nicer, but have no interest in a major city.

SDSU and Boise would not be the first to move anyway because of the MWC buyout. Navy is not going to join football only. Army will most likely not join without Navy. That means Memphis is out unless Army and Navy say no which I see as doubtful if offered. Air Force in the past stated they were not interested in the Big 12 because they did not feel with their recruiting limitations that they would be able to compete and they did not need money to be a bottom feeder. With Stanford, Cal, Navy, and Army all in a conference Air Force, or the other two Academies, should feel they can compete regularly.

In addition a school like Rice would help the three Academies feel they can compete regularly and it gives Navy another Texas school for recruiting that they have indicated is important to them. That also would appeal to Cal and Stanford. Tulane is pretty much the same since Louisiana is actually as much or more of a recruiting hot bed as Texas.

SMU, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army all join first. Air Force, CSU, and SDSU after the MWC buyout goes down.

Oregon State
WSU
Cal
Stanford
SDSU
CSU

Air Force
Army
Navy
Rice
Tulane
SMU

Topper wrote:

rodrod5 wrote:Boise is highly unlikely with Cal and Stanford. Even if they can get past "the academics" there is still the fact that Boise feast on California recruits. Part of the reason they are able to do that is players that actually want to get out of an area like Oakland or LA to go to school. Second is players that are not going to college to "play school" and are going there to play sports. Third is players from places in the valley that want to go come place nicer, but have no interest in a major city.

SDSU and Boise would not be the first to move anyway because of the MWC buyout. Navy is not going to join football only. Army will most likely not join without Navy. That means Memphis is out unless Army and Navy say no which I see as doubtful if offered. Air Force in the past stated they were not interested in the Big 12 because they did not feel with their recruiting limitations that they would be able to compete and they did not need money to be a bottom feeder. With Stanford, Cal, Navy, and Army all in a conference Air Force, or the other two Academies, should feel they can compete regularly.

In addition a school like Rice would help the three Academies feel they can compete regularly and it gives Navy another Texas school for recruiting that they have indicated is important to them. That also would appeal to Cal and Stanford. Tulane is pretty much the same since Louisiana is actually as much or more of a recruiting hot bed as Texas.

SMU, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army all join first. Air Force, CSU, and SDSU after the MWC buyout goes down.

Oregon State
WSU
Cal
Stanford
SDSU
CSU

Air Force
Army
Navy
Rice
Tulane
SMU

rodrod5 wrote:Boise is highly unlikely with Cal and Stanford. Even if they can get past "the academics" there is still the fact that Boise feast on California recruits. Part of the reason they are able to do that is players that actually want to get out of an area like Oakland or LA to go to school. Second is players that are not going to college to "play school" and are going there to play sports. Third is players from places in the valley that want to go come place nicer, but have no interest in a major city.

SDSU and Boise would not be the first to move anyway because of the MWC buyout. Navy is not going to join football only. Army will most likely not join without Navy. That means Memphis is out unless Army and Navy say no which I see as doubtful if offered. Air Force in the past stated they were not interested in the Big 12 because they did not feel with their recruiting limitations that they would be able to compete and they did not need money to be a bottom feeder. With Stanford, Cal, Navy, and Army all in a conference Air Force, or the other two Academies, should feel they can compete regularly.

In addition a school like Rice would help the three Academies feel they can compete regularly and it gives Navy another Texas school for recruiting that they have indicated is important to them. That also would appeal to Cal and Stanford. Tulane is pretty much the same since Louisiana is actually as much or more of a recruiting hot bed as Texas.

SMU, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army all join first. Air Force, CSU, and SDSU after the MWC buyout goes down.

Oregon State
WSU
Cal
Stanford
SDSU
CSU

Air Force
Army
Navy
Rice
Tulane
SMU

Dukie wrote:

rodrod5 wrote:Boise is highly unlikely with Cal and Stanford. Even if they can get past "the academics" there is still the fact that Boise feast on California recruits. Part of the reason they are able to do that is players that actually want to get out of an area like Oakland or LA to go to school. Second is players that are not going to college to "play school" and are going there to play sports. Third is players from places in the valley that want to go come place nicer, but have no interest in a major city.

SDSU and Boise would not be the first to move anyway because of the MWC buyout. Navy is not going to join football only. Army will most likely not join without Navy. That means Memphis is out unless Army and Navy say no which I see as doubtful if offered. Air Force in the past stated they were not interested in the Big 12 because they did not feel with their recruiting limitations that they would be able to compete and they did not need money to be a bottom feeder. With Stanford, Cal, Navy, and Army all in a conference Air Force, or the other two Academies, should feel they can compete regularly.

In addition a school like Rice would help the three Academies feel they can compete regularly and it gives Navy another Texas school for recruiting that they have indicated is important to them. That also would appeal to Cal and Stanford. Tulane is pretty much the same since Louisiana is actually as much or more of a recruiting hot bed as Texas.

SMU, Rice, Tulane, Navy, Army all join first. Air Force, CSU, and SDSU after the MWC buyout goes down.

Oregon State
WSU
Cal
Stanford
SDSU
CSU

Air Force
Army
Navy
Rice
Tulane
SMU

Congratulations, as an SMU fan (presumably) you have created divisions that put SMU in an incredibly far-flung junior division with none of the PAC 4 and only Navy and perhaps Army as *any* sort of draw at the gate at Ford Stadium. You used some words around why Memphis would not be invited but those words actually didn't relate to Memphis at all, or make sense.

SMU's goal should be a division-less conference with regular games against Stanford and Cal (and WSU and OSU for that matter).

rodrod5 wrote:Your reply makes no sense. It is hard to say that SMU is in a far flung conference with Tulane, Rice, and Navy that are all either close to SMU or already in a conference and in the same division as SMU. The only new one is Air Force that is not all that far. You seem to not understand the draw of Army, Navy, and Air Force vs. most schools. I suppose you are feeling that Tulsa, north Texas state, Temple, and UTSA are major draws? Or SMU fans are excited by ECU, USF, UAB, Charlotte, and FAU. Or that somehow in a conference with or without divisions that conference is not "far flung".

I am pretty positive that Stanford, Cal, Oregon State, and WSU fans are not going to be flocking to Ford Stadium. Perhaps SMU fans will, but perhaps SMU fans need to worry more about supporting their program by going to games against anyone and then SMU would not be in the position they are in now.

What applies to Memphis not being invited is the PAC is not going to be rebuilding a massive 14 or 16 team conference especially when academics still matter to the PAC members right or wrong. In addition if the PAC wants to rebuild with a larger conference and they are going to put academics aside then most likely Boise, UNLV, Nevada, and Fresno will be in play. That pretty much assures that SMU will still be in the eastern half of the conference and they will have the PAC members as home opponents even less frequently than what I laid out.

The goal of SMU should be to wake up to reality and realize that you can be with north Texas state, FAU, UAB, Charlotte, Temple, ECU, Tulsa, and others while pretending that something better is coming. Or SMU can realize they are not a "chooser" in this situation and they are not going to make any demands and polite request will probably be ignored, but a perceived improvement will be possible.

Congrats on not understanding at all what is going on here or what will make something beneficial happen for SMU.

Dukie wrote:

rodrod5 wrote:Your reply makes no sense. It is hard to say that SMU is in a far flung conference with Tulane, Rice, and Navy that are all either close to SMU or already in a conference and in the same division as SMU. The only new one is Air Force that is not all that far. You seem to not understand the draw of Army, Navy, and Air Force vs. most schools. I suppose you are feeling that Tulsa, north Texas state, Temple, and UTSA are major draws? Or SMU fans are excited by ECU, USF, UAB, Charlotte, and FAU. Or that somehow in a conference with or without divisions that conference is not "far flung".

I am pretty positive that Stanford, Cal, Oregon State, and WSU fans are not going to be flocking to Ford Stadium. Perhaps SMU fans will, but perhaps SMU fans need to worry more about supporting their program by going to games against anyone and then SMU would not be in the position they are in now.

What applies to Memphis not being invited is the PAC is not going to be rebuilding a massive 14 or 16 team conference especially when academics still matter to the PAC members right or wrong. In addition if the PAC wants to rebuild with a larger conference and they are going to put academics aside then most likely Boise, UNLV, Nevada, and Fresno will be in play. That pretty much assures that SMU will still be in the eastern half of the conference and they will have the PAC members as home opponents even less frequently than what I laid out.

The goal of SMU should be to wake up to reality and realize that you can be with north Texas state, FAU, UAB, Charlotte, Temple, ECU, Tulsa, and others while pretending that something better is coming. Or SMU can realize they are not a "chooser" in this situation and they are not going to make any demands and polite request will probably be ignored, but a perceived improvement will be possible.

Congrats on not understanding at all what is going on here or what will make something beneficial happen for SMU.

Slow down, take a deep breath or two, and read. Please.

You are attacking me for comparing that junior division in a new conference by noting that the AAC is far flung. My comparison was not to the AAC, it was to a smaller, new PAC 4-based conference (that's why I mentioned you've put the PAC 4, the only P5 holdovers in your idea, on the other side of the divisional divide). That would be terrible for SMU. I do agree with you that the new AAC is garbage and that SMU needs to get out, but it needs to get into an 8- or 10-team PAC 4-based conference, not some continent-wide amalgam that puts us with Rice, Tulane, and the service academies (and I didn't even get into the huge negatives of option-based opponents, but they're real, too).

SMU is not Michigan, but there is no binary "chooser" or "taker" in the levels of this thing. SMU has enough attractive components to not just take whatever 12- or 16-team conference is thrown at us.

Yes, the PAC 4 will not necessarily fill Ford with their fans. But they're better "name" draws than anyone you've put SMU into the junior division with.

On Memphis, here's what you said: "SDSU and Boise would not be the first to move anyway because of the MWC buyout. Navy is not going to join football only. Army will most likely not join without Navy. That means Memphis is out unless Army and Navy say no which I see as doubtful if offered." Please explain how any of that word salad actually is an explanation of why Memphis is out?

rodrod5 wrote:SDSU and Boise are not going to immediately join the PAC because the MWC has a $34 million dollar buyout. While I believe the PAC will get a media deal that makes it worth a buyout for teams to move the difference between a $34 million buyout and a reduced MWC buyout is still significant for any MWC member. That means that the PAC will wait the two years to add MWC members. I believe the PAC will want to have all three Academies. I believe the PAC is not going to go past 12 schools. So that means SMU, Tulane, Rice, Navy, and Army will be the first ones to join the 4 members of the PAC to make a 9 team conference. That means no other issues for the PAC with the NCAA and needing 8 teams to be a conference. That means a 9 team conference can play 8 conference games. That means the PAC has time to wait on the 3 MWC members they want. SDSU, CSU, and Air Force. That is 12 teams. That means Memphis is out.

If Army and Navy say no I still believe Memphis is out. Because at that point the PAC will simply play with 7 and wait out the MWC teams and add one more of them. I seriously doubt that Army and Navy will say no especially because I believe the money will be better and because it is about the only hope of all 3 of them ending up in the same conference. Even more so with heavy Texas recruiting plus Louisiana recruiting and San Diego for Navy and CSU for Air Force.

SMU will end up in the eastern half of that and they can deal with it. Or they can find themselves in the AAC without Navy, Tulane, and Rice. And probably with Texas State, maybe UTEP, or someone from the CUSA.

No one is attacking you. You just simply do not understand what is going on here. There is not going to be an 8 team PAC. There is not going to be a PAC with Cal, Stanford, Oregon State, WSU, Rice, SMU, Tulane, and CSU.

Nor will there be that with Air Force and Memphis added in. They are not going to take a single service academy. Nor are they going to have SMU, Memphis, Tulane, and Rice holding them over to get some of the MWC schools.

Any program that is not ready to make a jump of that has an issue will simply be moved on from. But for the programs in the AAC that might have an issue making the jump the replacements are going to come from the MWC pretty much without a doubt. Because once they have to go for programs they do not like the academics of the members of the PAC are going to go with programs that are closer to them. They are not going to be turned down by Rice or Tulane and then go for USF because of academics that is simply too far. They are not going to go with Memphis because "they are competitive" they will just go with Fresno or UNLV or some other MWC school.

mtrout wrote:rodrod5 is kliavkoff

Dukie wrote:

mtrout wrote:rodrod5 is kliavkoff

He’s intense and verbose and I like the dedication, but obviously I think he’s an Owl.