Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Arizona/Colorado are the two I want the most. They would be amazing fits in the league. And it would force the hand of the rest of them so ASU and maybe Utah would follow if they were smart.
I could see them being a little short, but I'm skeptical too. the Big 10 is a P2 regardless. Oregon-Ohio St was Ohio St's 2nd best regular season game all year, only behind Michigan-OSU (which was #1 in the country).
It is like the BIG has done nearly everything possible to destabilize the PAC. As though they are trying to force the mountain 4 out. UCLA leaves without anything from CA politics (a whimper two weeks later). Allow UW and Oregon to not "know" their status while have standing applications (it is almost always a formality by the time that happens). Yet several schools knowing right away not to wait on BIG, whereas to prevent schools from leaving, the BIG should have said 'maybe". . Are they trying to get the mountain schools to leave so that it is not the BIG that "killed" the PAC, and Cal, Stanford, UW, Oregon all vote for dissolution, thereby getting FOX the PAC brand to use as division in BIG?
Probably not, and the likely reason is everyone is waiting on ND. But I don't know, the fastest way to get ND is for max realignment to continue.
Or maybe they do prefer to go after ACC, in efforts to force ND's hand, with UVa, FSU, Miami, UNC. That would get them ND imo, which pays for Stanford and Duke. And likely KU at that point, as I've read FOX has ambitions of using BIG plus Big East to monetize new CBB post-season. That's 24 and a P1 that get them at least 1st in every major area except Texas. It also ***** ESPN, and with UW, Oregon, Utah, AZ, ASU, CU added to Big 12, FOX would control college athletics and that's without any further ACC additions to Big 12 (Clemson, VT, NCSt likely to SEC, but I think basketball schools would be tempted to align with FOX in Big 12).
Would the BIG presidents not spend some of the huge increase they have coming to get Stanford and Cal in particular? Unlike the Big 12, they can still subsidize some of the move via BTN in-market in the bay area. Having all 4 CA schools, making CA a BIG state, while adding Stanford and Cal as Big 10 institutions? I'm surprised the BIG presidents would pass on that over their increase being less. The only better time in which the BIG can add those without it being obvious they are giving up some gains, is if ND goes first this summer (before new deal is finalized). Adding Cal and Stanford also means twice the exposure via double the amount of opportunities to put the Iowa or Nebraska types in that late timeslot. Midwest and east fans won't stay up for the late game if two mediocre Pac12 teams, but a BIG vs new BIG get new viewers.
At least on UW and Oregon, you could argue that they take resources away from CA, so locking them out in the Big 12 leaves more exporting of talent to the Midwest. But with 6 PAC they likely retain some of the value tradition (Rose Bowl) and own the west
While I get your point, Clearly the Big 10 isn't interested in the State Schools and don't seem to have a real interest in the other two. The Big 12 has no appetite for being stuck with those state schools should the Big 10 come calling for Oregon and Washington.
Is a full merger the death of the PAC or the death of the Big 12?
Adding Oregon St and WSU to end the PAC sounds good until Stanford, Oregon and Washington leave before the GOR is signed and you're left with OSU, WSU, and whatever else stays.
Give the huge risk of PAC schools leaving for P2, a full merger is low on the list. The only thing lower is Big 12 schools going to PAC. It would be a bait and switch by the PAC.
You don't go full merger unless the possibility of ESPN adding top PAC schools to ACC is a real threat.
But that threat is also how you get some schools to jump. If ESPN is building the ACC as a P2.5, not all PAC schools are getting in. Why risk that? Join the Big 12, pushing it to become the first super conference of leftovers, and the risk of being left out is much, much lower. Join the Big 12 and be on the P3 selection committee, or there is an eventual log jam of 22 Pac and Big 12 schools trying to get an ESPN ticket to the ACC
I’m hedging against the albeit small percentage chance that the big 12 is vulnerable. By doing this you eliminate the competition and guarantee long-term survival.
Like everyone, I want Arizona and Arizona State the most but by giving them a small window with a threat of taking Washington state and Oregon State I think they would come.
If they call your bluff you either cripple the league and they end up coming anyways or they piece meal it together with SDSU, etc and it’s a house of cards until someone else leaves.
Like everyone, I want Arizona and Arizona State the most but by giving them a small window with a threat of taking Washington state and Oregon State I think they would come.
If they call your bluff you either cripple the league and they end up coming anyways or they piece meal it together with SDSU, etc and it’s a house of cards until someone else leaves.
With the expected $$$ in the CFP, I'd expect that's the avenue used to 'force' ND one way or the other. So, the next logical question is 'what is the voting body that determines who plays in CFP?' and then 'what/how is that body being modified to force the issue?'.
You don't jump to that this early
And inviting those two has risks- the PAC/ESPN could just say "thank you", then turn around and lure top Big 12 schools to either coast.
Offering a full merger is one thing, targeting WSU and Oregon St as a means to crumble the PAC is another.
Full merger only occurs if ACC gets involved in targeting PAC schools imo. The Big 12 can live with a Pac10 adding backfill, or staying at 10, as they'll very likely have another USC/OUT moment soon. What we can't let happen is ACC expand with PAC first.
But taking Oregon State & Washington State FIRST doesn't cripple the Pac12. In fact it would allow the Pac12 to be rid of it's 2 weakest schools. There is a big gap between OSU/WSU and the next least valuable school.
So far I have heard nothing in the Oregon/Washington desire to move to the Big10 or SEC that required a package deal with OSU/WSU. That's because they know it would END their chances of Big10/SEC interest.
Sure the Big10/SEC breakeven points for adding schools is much higher than Big12. But the Big12 schools have a smaller margin of error. We can't offset the strong incremental value of adding Oregon and Washington, by adding WSU & OSU.
Plus an gains of adding UW & OR might need to be offset by adding an Arizona, CU, Cal or Stanford.
Last edited:
They know we are bluffing when we threaten to take the two weakest schools in the PAC 10. Two poor revenue schools that are isolated geographically and add virtually nothing. Go ahead and make that bluff. Those schools add little value so PAC 12 isn’t concerned about losing OSU and WSU. Take only schools you really want. Arizona schools are the way to go. Leave the weaker schools.
There a BIG difference between ISU and WSU/OSU.
Look at any metric: attendance, school revenue, TV viewership, etc. and their performance PALES Iowa State.
What's an easier sell for TV Networks- top 25 FB, MBB & WBB teams playing in packed stadiums or mediocre teams with sparse attendance? I think I know where TV execs would lean.
We can do the same by taking the Arizonas and Colorado, who arent flight risks like Oregon and Washington or dumpster schools like WSU or OSU.
Also, the quote of not being diminitive makes 0 sense with your plan of taking 2 rental schools and keeping the 2 unwanted schools permanently
Mountain West recently signed a 4 million dollar deal with Fox. Idk anything more specific. Its still well below the Big 12 projection and id imagine under the Pac as well
That’s why any MWC school would jump at a PAC invite even if it was collapsing. WSU/OSU and any of the leftovers are worth more than the MWC schools especially with the PAC name. So the MWC schools would be able to double their money most likely by changing since the more valuable schools would be moving.
I'm starting to believe that the PAC hasn't been burnt enough yet. Their pride will keep them together even with less money. Until FL St and Clemson figure out how to get out of their GOR or the money is good enough to leave despite the GOR things will settle down. Eventually the ACC will fall it just might take 10 years. When it happens the PAC could lose more schools and all the leftovers will be available at that point. Big 12 is in a good position and should hold off taking anyone that doesn't increase their value, because eventually schools that could increase it will be there for the taking. At that point it won't be the hateful 8, it'll be the scorned 20.
I think because cable (and other TV package suppliers) might start dropping them. For every person willing to pay $30 a month they have 100 people paying $7 a month that never even watch their channels.
I would be for taking 2-4 schools that hold value, wouldn’t need them to increase value right away. If we can hamper the PAC and set them on the road to imploding, it would help us competition wise in the future.
It’s also a balancing act. Charge me $30 and I subscribe and cancel as I want things. Charge $7 and I leave it for the year.
Exactly, ridding the PAC of two bottom feeders actually makes them more desirable to potential schools joining.
