I’ve said from the beginning, and was told I was wrong, that the Pac# is dead. Nothing I’ve seen since then has changed my mind. Maybe it will by October. I’d wager it won’t and when October rolls around, I think we’ll see for sure that the Pac is in the midst of their last season.

I agree one of the conferences will cease to exist shortly. My only thought is there more of a “value” to the PAC name as opposed to the Mountain West? And vale’s isn’t just financial, but name recognition as well.

The value comes from the school and market they bring more than the name of the conference. Now, IF a big-name conference is full of highly valued schools, then yes, the conference as a whole has more total value. The PAC name no longer means anything. At this point, the MW, as a whole, has more value than the PAC even though it is a DI-AA conference.

(08-30-2023 05:55 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  I’ve said from the beginning, and was told I was wrong, that the Pac# is dead. Nothing I’ve seen since then has changed my mind. Maybe it will by October. I’d wager it won’t and when October rolls around, I think we’ll see for sure that the Pac is in the midst of their last season.

You're wrong.

We’ll see.

(08-30-2023 06:27 PM)TexanFan Wrote:  I agree one of the conferences will cease to exist shortly. My only thought is there more of a “value” to the PAC name as opposed to the Mountain West? And vale’s isn’t just financial, but name recognition as well.

If OSU and WSU join the MWC but they use the PAC name, nobody is going to take them seriously if they try to claim they are the same league that exists today. It would be like the Southern Conference trying to say they are big time because Alabama, Georgia, etc used to be members.

(08-30-2023 05:55 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  I’ve said from the beginning, and was told I was wrong, that the Pac# is dead. Nothing I’ve seen since then has changed my mind. Maybe it will by October. I’d wager it won’t and when October rolls around, I think we’ll see for sure that the Pac is in the midst of their last season.

It’s possibly 50-50 that we’ll even know by October.

$70 million in credits and assets (mostly tournament credits) is available to whomever remains of the Pac-12, if they can keep the organization going somehow (the $70 million pays out over multiple years, not at once), perhaps including some sort of “reverse merger” with another conference. So there’s some incentive for OSU & WSU to wait out Stanford and Cal. There might be as much incentive for Stanford and Cal to do the same, though when it comes to other income sources, they can only wait each other out for so long. OSU and WSU are therefore not inclined to dissuade the Bay schools from joining the ACC, especially if (and it is VERY likely) they aren’t also invited. To a point.

The MWC has sent multiple teams to the dance for several years and have a Final Four coming. While not as much as the Pac #, it still a sizable amount and makes any conference change mean less as the difference doesn’t negates the cost of moving and what payouts are left behind.

(Sees self making a semi-important decision based on a whiff of common sense and rumors the ACC would vote against Californian expansion. Naturally, the ACC votes to expand. Suddenly thinks self an agent of chaos via bad predictions.)

So guess who’s about to become members (for a couple years or so) of the Pacific 8 Conference?

The Montanas!

UC Davis! (I can’t bring myself to select Sac State after having been in their gym)

Portland State!

Seattle! Denver!

This buys OSU and WSU that smidge of credibility to then cherry-pick MWC schools while biding time for a few years before some sort of sudden airport conference breakaway meeting. Laughter being virtually guaranteed is a plus.

(09-01-2023 12:28 PM)Pounder Wrote:  (Sees self making a semi-important decision based on a whiff of common sense and rumors the ACC would vote against Californian expansion. Naturally, the ACC votes to expand. Suddenly thinks self an agent of chaos via bad predictions.)

So guess who’s about to become members (for a couple years or so) of the Pacific 8 Conference?

The Montanas!

UC Davis! (I can’t bring myself to select Sac State after having been in their gym)

Portland State!

Seattle! Denver!

This buys OSU and WSU that smidge of credibility to then cherry-pick MWC schools while biding time for a few years before some sort of sudden airport conference breakaway meeting. Laughter being virtually guaranteed is a plus.

Indeed they did; though it did get a little dicey right up to the event horizon. Its a move the ACC had to make, and boy, oh boy, did SMU come out smelling like a bunch of ripe petunias! Sure, they bought their way in, but it FiNALLY gets them past the death penalty, and it just might make that ancient TCU-SMU rivalry relevant again.

Ancient? They’ve played most every year in most sports for a while now. Football cools a bit in coming years, but that may change now. For now, they are focused on the Fort Worth matchup in a month.

(09-01-2023 10:24 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Ancient? They’ve played most every year in most sports for a while now. Football cools a bit in coming years, but that may change now. For now, they are focused on the Fort Worth matchup in a month.

Ancient = been playing/hating each other for a long, long time.

TCU now views it as just another "W", but the game use to actually mean something back in the SWC days. Maybe it shall again now that both programs are back in the big time.

Gotcha, makes sense.

SMU has won a few the last couple of decades. I think TCU saw it as a schedule hit for playoff resume, but as long as they keep scheduling FCS, I view it as a cop out.

The now Pac2 or 2Pac conference has extremely limited options. With Stanford and Cal in the mix they could have raided the AAC, but now their best option is the reverse merger with the MWC keeping the PAC name. Montana and Idaho would also be a real possibility if they would be interested in moving to/back to FBS. It is either that or just join the MWC. A lot will hinge on the lawsuit they are putting up against the other PAC12 schools at the moment.

(09-02-2023 12:28 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Gotcha, makes sense.

SMU has won a few the last couple of decades. I think TCU saw it as a schedule hit for playoff resume, but as long as they keep scheduling FCS, I view it as a cop out.

Agreed. It's a small-time copout. As long as TCU features FCS matchups, they have no credibility dissing an over 100 year old rivalry with SMU. Beating Nichols State is not exactly a resume' filler. (I loved it in 2001 when TCU lost 27-24 to another Southland Conference team, Northwestern State, and then acted like it was a loss to Big10 school Northwestern.)

(09-14-2023 02:20 PM)wewererebels Wrote:  

(09-02-2023 12:28 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  Gotcha, makes sense.

SMU has won a few the last couple of decades. I think TCU saw it as a schedule hit for playoff resume, but as long as they keep scheduling FCS, I view it as a cop out.

Agreed. It's a small-time copout. As long as TCU features FCS matchups, they have no credibility dissing an over 100 year old rivalry with SMU. Beating Nichols State is not exactly a resume' filler. (I loved it in 2001 when TCU lost 27-24 to another Southland Conference team, Northwestern State, and then acted like it was a loss to Big10 school Northwestern.)

I loved it more when the mavs beat em a couple times.