PonyFans.com

This is more rambling thoughts and an ask for ideas:

There are very few options for getting to a "power" conference unless the ACC does expand...after I guess FL-ST, UNC, etc leave? or somehow the Pac doesn't get voted out of the power club... and the MWC doesn't suck up all the spots, with thier mediocrity, in a merger...and the PAC is able to expand with the best of the rest?

Even if we don't get to a power conference, it sure would be nice to play some schools that are interesting and/or similar. I didn't mind the UNT or UTSA adds to the AAC (since at least they are Texas teams that invest in football); though it is difficult to swallow the academic downgrade in conference mates. Rice was a nice add for obvious academic reasons and old SWC memories but UNCC?? I find it difficult to want to attend games against Temple, ECU and USF already much less UAB and UNCC and FAU. I must say I never found UCF or Cincinnatti all that compelling either though they were obviously good teams on the field.

So the questions: What options do we have? Any ideas about how to improve the situation?

It feels like the MWC and PAC2 are further along in merger talks than I thought and playing Nevada or UT-ST or SJST or NM isn't any better than our mess.

Do we just wait until the ACC implodes then join schools left behind?

Syracuse, Boston, Pitt, Wake, maybe Duke? These would all be fantastic along with Tulane and Rice. Maybe Cal and Stanford will still need homes?

I think some of the 7 trying to leave the ACC are going to be surprised. I keep wondering if the SEC really wants FL-ST and Clemson? The SEC wins way more championships than everyone else combined, with the teams they have. adding FL-ST would just weaken Florida. It's not a new market.

I'm sure the Big10 will expand
It has name brands that are "has beens" but it thinks getting bigger makes it more competitive against the SEC. When the midwest was farmland Nebraska, Iowa, etc mattered. Heck not even the top of the conference wins and now they've added more of the same (more schools no more wins).

The Big 12 has a bunch of unrelated teams that look like a cleanup from a cereal isle spill swept together in a trash bin.

I'm a Texas guy so I could go for an all Texas conference too once most schools are shut out of what ESPN & FOX are building... but I'd prefer to either be included with/join a bunch of schools with similar academics and long histories like those that will be left behind once the ACC gets blasted.

Anyone have creative ideas or thoughts?

It's definitely feeling like the ACC will need to lose teams first or the PAC will need to add quality for us to move up soon. Otherwise maybe we settle back into the AAC and hope to keep our coach and momentum? We've definitely made ourselves the villain which is actually a fun place to be in football.

As a mid-Atlantic guy, I see UNCC. It gives ECU a partner. Charlotte is a growing metropolis. The AAC is all about markets. I don’t get UNT. If you wanted a Texas school, I would have chosen UTEP for market expansion. I would see UNT if we were leaving. That’s why I had hope that we would be joining a P5 conference. And perhaps we were one of the schools blackballed by USC before they bolted. Our course now is to make ourselves the best looking girl at the dance. That means dominating the AAC and winning OOC games against P5 teams. It means being in the CFP and winning a first round game against a likely Big Ten #2 or an SEC #2. Do that and attendance will jump, and the P5s will want us.

How about this:

AAC West
SMU
UNT
Rice
UTSA
UAB
Tulane
Tulsa

birddogger wrote:

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.

Temple, Rice or FAU variety?

Rice always makes his cut line for inclusion for some reason, that’s why I said that.

Wait til ACC falls apart and then do something like this…

Wake
Duke
Navy/UConn
BC
Pitt
Cuse

SMU
Memphis
Tulane
Rice
Colorado State
Air Force

Washington State
Stanford
Cal
Oregon State
SDSU
Boise St

Rice makes the final cut in my discussion for three reasons. One they can afford the buyout. Two they have the academics that Cal and Stanford care about. Three they are in Texas and specifically Houston. That is not to remotely say I believe they "deliver that market" because they really don't, but it is because other programs would be able to play in that market and recruit it. This is important to a program like Navy and they have made that clear time and again. Even if Navy was not one of the ones offered the same theory applies to other programs. In addition Rice is close to Tulane and SMU that both have the same criteria.

SMU is included in these discussions for similar reasons. Financial ability, academics, and location. While SMU has had more success on the field than Rice by easily measurable amounts the reality is Boise, Memphis, Fresno, and others can point to on the field and court success over a lot longer period and would have a lot more to point to. Memphis talks about "big donors", but they never seem to get them to show up until the last minute and when things do not happen they fade away only to show up the next time something might happen. But still it is clearly more about academics and demonstrable finances vs. simply athletics.

Waiting for something to happen with the ACC is a horrible mistake. That seems unlikely at this point and for a number of years from now. If something does happen with them there is no guarantee that they reform. If SMU is a viable candidate for them if something does somehow happen to the ACC in the near future then there is no reason to believe that SMU would not be a candidate at that time. Certainly being out of the AAC and in a better conference should be a benefit. And the PAC reformed is not going to have a massively long TV deal it will be 5 or 6 years at the most. Who knows if it will even have a GOR.

The Seattle Times estimates that a reformed PAC with some AAC teams, some MWC teams I think will have a chance, and a couple of MWC teams I do not feel are candidates will have about a $10.5 million TV deal and a $20 million total distribution. That is above a merger with the MWC.

The hiring of Oliver Luck indicates to me this is the direction the PAC is looking at. I think things could get to a total distribution slightly over that. Clearly worth it to AAC and MWC teams to join especially if MWC teams can wait for a lower buyout.

We need to focus on one of two options which share alignment with higher academically oriented schools. This will both raise our national brand and reputation while joining a more competitive conference.

I like Stanford as a conference mate, along with Cal. If they can resurrect the PAC-X, I would be interested.

Or, join the ACC which has the risk of losing a couple of schools, FSU and Clemson most likely. I don’t see seven schools departing because who would take that many? The loss of the Seminoles and Tigers would be unfortunate but the ACC would still be P4 and very competitive. The ACC would certainly want to keep them but they would still be a great conference without them. UNC and UVA are attractive academic brands for the B1G10, more so that FSU and Clemson in my opinion.

Given the ACC’s GORs problem, they will stay together even if FSU and Clemson can afford to leave and do. They are both football factories. More so that the balance of their conference mates.

So, we continue to focus on a Stanford-led PAC-X or join the ACC with Tulane (and perhaps with Stanford and Cal), even with the loss of the two big programs.

Thank you for all the thoughts!

I had not heard about Luck and the PAC. That's great news as he's respected, creative and it shows the PAC is thinking about ways to stick around. It feels like he could be helpful in securing p5 votes to resist a down grade of the PAC.

In the end I'm not so worried about being part of the P2 as I am about being stuck in a conference of uninspiring "foes"

interesting read about Media value for PAC 12

Pac-12 rebuild: Estimating the media valuation of a reconstructed conference
What if Stanford, Cal, WSU and OSU stick together and expand? By JON WILNER |

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/08/11/ ... onference/

Given Wilners article does 2024 PAC-10 look like this? 

SDSU-

solid academics, big
market, strong football,
excellent bball, good recruiting area

BOISE-

not an academic fit but
stong TV brand, solid
football & bball

SMU-

Very good academic fit, big
market, known brand,
rising football & bball
good recruiting area

RICE-

great academic fit, big
market, capacity to invest
in football & bball
good recruiting area

TULANE-

Very good academic fit, ok
market, strong football
recently, respectable bball
good recruiting area

Wilner seemed to value this group above 10 million.

WHO IS THE 10TH??? 
I can't see Fresno or Colorado State getting the nod.  Air Force fits academically and is competitive in football but limited because of NIL.
UTSA is up and coming in football with a strong fan base and media market but a bit like Fresno academically.  Memphis too isn't a good academic fit, ok market but good football and basketball.  USF is too far away and Tulsa is in a bad market with ok football and bball. UNLV  "football only" could work with a bball school because and only because of Vegas.

WHO IS #10

Is anybody else concerned that all the ACC talk is about Stanford and Cal with never a mention of SMU? Phillips -ACC said they were only interested in adds that would bring additional revenue. IMO our offer would add money since we would play for 5 yrs without getting 'our share' of the additional revenue. Yet there seems to be little interest in adding us.