ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment | Page 343 | Syracusefan.com

ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment

I don't understand the PAC's end game now. Utah State? Big school, high pop growth state, that makes sense. But it's not a brand and it's not going to bring any additional value to a TV deal.

The PAC is going to end up with a deal that's somewhere between the current MW deal and the current American deal. So what's the point? They could have done a reverse merger with the MW, cut a new deal (which was expiring in 2 years anyway) and ended up in the same place.

Realignment continues to be rash and reactive.
 
Scooch said:
I don't understand the PAC's end game now. Utah State? Big school, high pop growth state, that makes sense. But it's not a brand and it's not going to bring any additional value to a TV deal.

The PAC is going to end up with a deal that's somewhere between the current MW deal and the current American deal. So what's the point? They could have done a reverse merger with the MW, cut a new deal (which was expiring in 2 years anyway) and ended up in the same place.

Realignment continues to be rash and reactive.
Expand...
Maybe it's not their end game, but I think they may be playing the longer-term game at this point.

Before they can lure some schools that actually bring value., they may feel they need to add enough teams just to be able to call themselves a "viable" conference. Utah St and others fit that bill, I guess.
1727185315886.gif
 
orange79 said:
Maybe it's not their end game, but I think they may be playing the longer-term game at this point.

Before they can lure some schools that actually bring value., they may feel they need to add enough teams just to be able to call themselves a "viable" conference. Utah St and others fit that bill, I guess. View attachment 245214
Expand...
Yup. The PAC clearly thought they were going to build the strongest conference in the group of 5 (or is it group of 6 now?). Hence courting those AAC schools.

But when they declined I'm not sure the PAC has a strong plan B. I don't blame the AAC schools, ~$10million/year isn't enough to join a cross-country conference. That only works financially with power conference money.
 
Scooch said:
I don't understand the PAC's end game now. Utah State? Big school, high pop growth state, that makes sense. But it's not a brand and it's not going to bring any additional value to a TV deal.

The PAC is going to end up with a deal that's somewhere between the current MW deal and the current American deal. So what's the point? They could have done a reverse merger with the MW, cut a new deal (which was expiring in 2 years anyway) and ended up in the same place.

Realignment continues to be rash and reactive.
Expand...
They are the #3 team in the state and only get 19k per game. Seems like plan D to me.
 
Scooch said:
Huh? Can you explain what a "shot at BYU" entails?
Expand...
BYU has many fans who have been hard bashing the Pac for years for not taking BYU. During that same time, BYU also decided that it could no longer play Utah St annually as it had for the most part for many decades. That always is central to any Utah St fan. They now will rub Pac membership for them in BYU faces all the time.
 
WoadBlue said:
BYU has many fans who have been hard bashing the Pac for years for not taking BYU. During that same time, BYU also decided that it could no longer play Utah St annually as it had for the most part for many decades. That always is central to any Utah St fan. They now will rub Pac membership for them in BYU faces all the time.
Expand...
Ah. OK.

I'm sure the BYU fans will dry their tears with the stacks of million dollar bills they're getting from the Big 12.
 
JRHEETER said:
PAC 12 is trying to get to 8 teams

They have to get to 8 teams to stay in FBS.

NCAA gave them a two year grace period to try and get up to 8 teams to stay in FBS.

So they aren’t being terribly picky.
Expand...
The Pac12 is a slightly better MWC
 
Scooch said:
Ah. OK.

I'm sure the BYU fans will dry their tears with the stacks of million dollar bills they're getting from the Big 12.
Expand...

Ha. The PAC's new expansion strategy is spite.
 
WoadBlue said:
I have reread in a number of places that Utah has not signed a full Big 12 GOR, which means it is easy for Utah to announce its leaving in a couple years. If that is the case, the ACC should be all over Utah right now. If Utah gets into the ACC, then you can bet that both Arizona and AZ St are going to want to follow as soon as they can.
Expand...

Hoo's That said:
C'mon over, Utah, and give us that lacrosse AQ!
Expand...
Per our board, UVa is giving Utah another taste of the MLax high life in C'ville this spring. We played them in 2019.
 
Chip said:
Ha. The PAC's new expansion strategy is spite.
Expand...
No, but the Pac would know all about BYU and why Utah St would woo the Pac so hard. And know that if Pac membership helps Utah ST that it will to some degree hinder BYU, which will always have animus against even the name Pac.

So the Pac gets a quick and easy #7.
 
OrangeXtreme said:
Expand...
Thanks, OX.

Some interesting takeaways:
- PAC is essentially the MW and has little value, the PAC will be a G5/6 conference
- PAC TV advisers are not working with concrete numbers and the AAC teams are cautious and skeptic about the money.
- FSU has spent $3MM on the lawsuit [I thought they would have exceeded this mark by now, regardless, this is money FSU does not really have to waste, based on their own court filings and the fees keep going up]
- Bret McMurphy does not think there is any way out for FSU and Clemson, the latest action is only to save face (financial incentive based on TV ratings)
- ACC has approached the lawsuits from a position of strength [I think the majority on this board agrees with this, though we still vary regarding the accuracy of the ACC's position]
- SEC and B1G don't want one or two teams from ACC but will take several if ACC falls apart. [This was especially interesting because McMurphy speculated 2-4-6 teams to the B1G and most of us on this site and other sites agree the SEC would have some interest in as many as 8-9 - UM, FSU, CU, GATech, UNC, NCState, UVA, VATech, Louisville]
-SEC and B1G are content to wait out the ACC GOR to pick off teams, though both will likely act if the ACC falls apart {They will not be incentivizing any schools to leave early, this is consistent as both conferences would have taken the new schools early but they had to get out on their own w/USC/UCLA then the other PAC teams leaving at the end of their GOR and UT and OU buying out their last year of the GOR]
 
I know that the PAC isn't going to be a power conference anymore but glad it will still exist. Regional too.
 
sutomcat said:
FSU is saying that the original deadline for review/renewal 2 years after the start of the ACCN was moved to February of 2025 with an addition to the contract. One of the things they are upset about is that the change to the contract was alledgely made without a vote of the conference members, only by the commissioner. And that the ACC got nothing for that concession.

Which I think is correct.

I have seen the February 2025 deadline for ESPN to renew the contract to 2036 from many sources. Including some ESPN articles. I am pretty sure it is legit.

Everytime I see it, including in ESPN articles, the article says it is widely believed ESPN is going to renew the contract. But they haven’t done so yet. I assume this is because they want to see what the ACC looks like by that point. If it still includes FSU and Clemson, I assume it will be renewed. If those schools somehow leave, maybe they don’t renew. Or more lilkely, they renew and give the remaining ACC member a nice haircut.

It will be interesting to see what ESPN does if the lawsuits are still going on in February of 2025. I am not sure when all the lawsuits will be resolved but have heard many people say it is likely going to take a long time.

Hopefully this mess is over before Christmas.
Expand...
The lawsuits will not be resolved by February.
 
OrangeXtreme said:
Expand...
It's wild that these changes are so short-term and transient that it makes sense for a lot of schools to stay put and reap the cash from exit fees. I mean, why not? I highly doubt the PAC schools will have any kind of meaningful GOR, so they can all swap partners in a few years, and a few years after that, and a few years after that.
 
Scooch said:
It's wild that these changes are so short-term and transient that it makes sense for a lot of schools to stay put and reap the cash from exit fees. I mean, why not? I highly doubt the PAC schools will have any kind of meaningful GOR, so they can all swap partners in a few years, and a few years after that, and a few years after that.
Expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Crusty
    • Like
    • Love
    • Dislike
If we keep this up we are going to be left behind.
2 3
Replies
72
Views
4K
Crusty
Crusty
S
    • Like
UNLV and the ACC
Replies
0
Views
393
sufan59
S
SWC75
The Undefeated -after Week 10
Replies
0
Views
186
SWC75
SWC75
SWC75
The Undefeated - after week 11
Replies
0
Views
180
SWC75
SWC75
IthacaMatt
    • Like
Most impressive wins so far
Replies
4
Views
898
orangenauburn
orangenauburn

Forum statistics

Threads
170,540
Messages
4,897,527
Members
6,004
Latest member
fsaracene

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
251
Guests online
1,327
Total visitors
1,578
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom