PonyFans.com

Cal is not in a position to be too picky but I can't see them being in the same conference as BYU and Baylor given their civil rights positions and Title IX problems.

Topper wrote:Cal is not in a position to be too picky but I can't see them being in the same conference as BYU and Baylor given their civil rights positions and Title IX problems.

Topper, while I would hold out hope that there is an ethical bone in some college leader's body, the $$$(s) drive this bus.

Big XII and PAC 8 merger to create a 20 member conference, the largest in FBS. Not sure how they would structure that group and schedule but as wacky as college sports is becoming, why not?

I think CP is right. Newly merged Big 12 and PAC have western division of old PAC teams plus SDSU. Then ACC is relegated to SMU, Tulane, USF and either UConn or WV. If Wv, then newly merged Big 12 and PAC has 10 team east and 10 team west, if IΓÇÖm not off in my count

If the Pac4 go to the Big 12, I doubt the ACC will expand with SMU and weak sisters like Tulane, Memphis and USF. The Bulls are AAU but not like SMU in terms of scholarship. Tulane has great academics but a much lower commitment to athletics. Hopefully Cal and Stanford are using the Big 12 as leverage with the ACC.

Topper wrote:Cal is not in a position to be too picky but I can't see them being in the same conference as BYU and Baylor given their civil rights positions and Title IX problems.

To continue on this line of thinking (and no intent on blowing the thread up although there is a possibility):

Recent history demonstrates that the PAC-12 rejected BYU (for the LDS ΓÇ£interferingΓÇ¥ in CA politics and other MWC schools not being up to PAC-12(10) standards creates interesting questions:

Is money more important than being in a league with teams (BYU and Baylor) that is vehemently opposed to their progressive agenda?

Is money more important than being in a league that is ΓÇ£beneathΓÇ¥ their academics?

I am NOT commenting on who is right or who is wrong. The issues is how the West Coast perceive their roles and values and how does that affect the decision to join one or the other conference. Remember we are dealing with University Pres who are not anchored in reality.

Way WAY back in the day the University of Chicago was an athletic powerhouse...and that died on the altar of academics alone. I know, different era and culture, but Cal and Stanford have strong academic traditions AND alums who want athletic success...ask one Sonny Dykes about that one.

Sacrifice academics for athletic success? Not going to happen. But the financial numbers don't work unless the revenue stream is close...unless you are SMU, and have a few heavy hitters who have carried the weight of funding our athletics for the sake of folks like me.

I do think that in this current storm of realignment, any harbor might be welcomed, even if you were partnered with the folks in Waco or the ones wearing funny underwear.

https://twitter.com/Brett_McMurphy/stat ... 47291?s=20

Despite various reports to the contrary, Big 12 has not had conversations w/any of the Pac-4 schools & has no intention in engaging w/those schools, multiple Big 12 sources told

https://twitter.com/dennisdoddcbs/statu ... 97843?s=20

This. Multiple sources shot this down to me yesterday.
Quote

Brett McMurphy
@Brett_McMurphy
┬╖
5h
Despite various reports to the contrary, Big 12 has not had conversations w/any of the Pac-4 schools & has no intention in engaging w/those schools, multiple Big 12 sources told @ActionNetworkHQ

https://twitter.com/futbal_dog/status/1 ... 43764?s=20

Tidbits:

Big12 story was leaked to push along the ACC. ESPN did contact the Big12 but the interest is not there on either side.

Conspiracy theory that ACC doesnΓÇÖt want to move forward until after the Wed CFP meeting. Would allow Stanford/Cal an ΓÇ£pac12ΓÇ¥ vote.

The merits of bringing all 3 teams into the league isnΓÇÖt being debated much; itΓÇÖs how to spend the money. At $50mil+, they need to pitch all members ~2mil to make the travel work, which gives about 20-25mil in success dollars (IΓÇÖll guess 2/3 football, 1/3 basketball). That debate is a a sticky point.

SMU fans every time an article comes out that only mention’s Stanford and Cal… breathe. The math to the west coast only works with SMU. Jim Hart, I’m available for DM updates from “reliable sources”.

Even Clemson is SAYING positive things. I donΓÇÖt think FSU can ignore the money but canΓÇÖt show support for anything that has them staying. This is a good deal
For the ACC, I think all 3 get it done Tues (or Thur)

SMU fans: If this gets done, and at some point the ACC wants to add another TX school, which one would you prefer and why?

Thank you, Shanty. Good info coming from you and is much appreciated.

Graceland Tar Heel wrote:SMU fans: If this gets done, and at some point the ACC wants to add another TX school, which one would you prefer and why?

I would like Rice to be the Texas partner but I donΓÇÖt feel they are as committed to athletics. If I had to choose one from the conference, it would be Tulane.

I have not been enamored with Rice because of that lack of commitment issue, but the idea of potentially establishing an ACC presence in Houston to challenge the b12 and coog high does make me giggle a little.