(03-14-2018 05:05 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  PAC obviously has some issues as a 3 bid basketball league, failing TV network and inconsistent FB power. This is an attempt to fix some of their issues.

By last year final FB ratings.

PAC I
1. Oklahoma (8)
4. Southern Cal (14)
6. Stanford (21)
8. Texas (36)
10. Oregon (48)
12. Texas Tech (55)
14. UCLA (60)
16. Colorado (86)
18. Kansas (123)

PAC II
2. TCU (11)
3. Washington (12)
5. Oklahoma St. (16)
7. Washington St. (33)
9. Utah (47)
11. Arizona St. (49)
13. Arizona (58)
15. Cal (71)
17. Oregon St. (119)

This solves the age old problem for the PAC; how to handle divisions including central timezone schools.

The whole conference would have higher TV ratings and be more of a must see TV product.

ADD Gonzaga AS BASKETBALL ONLY...AND HAWAII FOR ANOTHER TIME ZONE and you may be on to something.

BYU needs a place at the table as well... you can then stream PAC 18 games to central and south America where Mormons convert the restless natives to Mormonism...

Stream games to Iphones in the American Somoas as well... those guys go Mormon and they make great football players... (mainly linemen and fullbacks though...)

PAC 18 +3 or maybe 2...is great idea... cross many timezones..many samoans.... great ideas guys!!!!

(03-14-2018 05:05 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  PAC obviously has some issues as a 3 bid basketball league, failing TV network and inconsistent FB power. This is an attempt to fix some of their issues.

By last year final FB ratings.

PAC I
1. Oklahoma (8)
4. Southern Cal (14)
6. Stanford (21)
8. Texas (36)
10. Oregon (48)
12. Texas Tech (55)
14. UCLA (60)
16. Colorado (86)
18. Kansas (123)

PAC II
2. TCU (11)
3. Washington (12)
5. Oklahoma St. (16)
7. Washington St. (33)
9. Utah (47)
11. Arizona St. (49)
13. Arizona (58)
15. Cal (71)
17. Oregon St. (119)

This solves the age old problem for the PAC; how to handle divisions including central timezone schools.

The whole conference would have higher TV ratings and be more of a must see TV product.

The problem both the PAC and Big 12 have is too many teams in states with 6M or less in population: Oregon, Oklahoma, Kansas. I would even argue Arizona doesnt have the population to support 2 teams.

If any teams drive a restructuring it will be USC, Stanford, and Texas.

They would lead an airport meeting of the following:
Texas, TCU, USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Utah, Colorado.

1) the first step is to stabilize the west and get to a clear 12 by telling Washington, Oregon, Kansas and Arizona that we are taking 1 team from your state. You are our first choice and you have a day to decide.

2) at the same time you gauge Oklahoma without Oklahoma State and offer if they accept now Oklahoma State would be a contingency. The schools would also support Oklahoma’s pursuit of AAU status. If not then no contingency offered.

3) then work your contingencies:

Ask Missouri if no take Texas Tech
Ask Texas A&M if no take Houston
Ask Nebraska if no take Oklahoma State

That gives you basically the old PAC 8 in the West:
USC (AAU), UCLA (AAU), Stanford (AAU), Cal (AAU), Oregon (AAU), Washington (AAU), Utah (AAU), Arizona (AAU)

In the east you have:
Texas (AAU), Kansas (AAU), Colorado (AAU), Oklahoma (AAU hopeful), TCU,
Missouri (AAU)/Texas Tech, Texas A&M (AAU)/Houston, Nebraska/Oklahoma State.

This gives every team representing 6-9 million in population.

(03-18-2018 12:40 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  The problem both the PAC and Big 12 have is too many teams in states with 6M or less in population: Oregon, Oklahoma, Kansas. I would even argue Arizona doesnt have the population to support 2 teams.

If any teams drive a restructuring it will be USC, Stanford, and Texas.

They would lead an airport meeting of the following:
Texas, TCU, USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Utah, Colorado.

1) the first step is to stabilize the west and get to a clear 12 by telling Washington, Oregon, Kansas and Arizona that we are taking 1 team from your state. You are our first choice and you have a day to decide.

2) at the same time you gauge Oklahoma without Oklahoma State and offer if they accept now Oklahoma State would be a contingency. The schools would also support Oklahoma’s pursuit of AAU status. If not then no contingency offered.

3) then work your contingencies:

Ask Missouri if no take Texas Tech
Ask Texas A&M if no take Houston
Ask Nebraska if no take Oklahoma State

That gives you basically the old PAC 8 in the West:
USC (AAU), UCLA (AAU), Stanford (AAU), Cal (AAU), Oregon (AAU), Washington (AAU), Utah (AAU), Arizona (AAU)

In the east you have:
Texas (AAU), Kansas (AAU), Colorado (AAU), Oklahoma (AAU hopeful), TCU,
Missouri (AAU)/Texas Tech, Texas A&M (AAU)/Houston, Nebraska/Oklahoma State.

This gives every team representing 6-9 million in population.

I seem to recall your having proposed this "one-day ultimatum" idea before, as well as the idea that any current Big Ten or SEC school would ever leave for the Big 12, Pac-#, or some combination thereof. Do you actually believe these are realistic, or are you just saying that this is what you think should happen?

I don't see a merger likely at all.

Instead I see teams from both conferences and others leaving to create a new conference intended to monopolize the major college sports market in the Western US

PAC 20 West

Oregon
Washington
California
Stanford
UCLA
Southern Cal
Arizona
Arizona State
Boise
UNLV

PAC 20 East

BYU
Utah
Colorado
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas
Texas
Texas Tech
TCU

(03-18-2018 01:25 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 12:40 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  The problem both the PAC and Big 12 have is too many teams in states with 6M or less in population: Oregon, Oklahoma, Kansas. I would even argue Arizona doesnt have the population to support 2 teams.

If any teams drive a restructuring it will be USC, Stanford, and Texas.

They would lead an airport meeting of the following:
Texas, TCU, USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Utah, Colorado.

1) the first step is to stabilize the west and get to a clear 12 by telling Washington, Oregon, Kansas and Arizona that we are taking 1 team from your state. You are our first choice and you have a day to decide.

2) at the same time you gauge Oklahoma without Oklahoma State and offer if they accept now Oklahoma State would be a contingency. The schools would also support Oklahoma’s pursuit of AAU status. If not then no contingency offered.

3) then work your contingencies:

Ask Missouri if no take Texas Tech
Ask Texas A&M if no take Houston
Ask Nebraska if no take Oklahoma State

That gives you basically the old PAC 8 in the West:
USC (AAU), UCLA (AAU), Stanford (AAU), Cal (AAU), Oregon (AAU), Washington (AAU), Utah (AAU), Arizona (AAU)

In the east you have:
Texas (AAU), Kansas (AAU), Colorado (AAU), Oklahoma (AAU hopeful), TCU,
Missouri (AAU)/Texas Tech, Texas A&M (AAU)/Houston, Nebraska/Oklahoma State.

This gives every team representing 6-9 million in population.

I seem to recall your having proposed this "one-day ultimatum" idea before, as well as the idea that any current Big Ten or SEC school would ever leave for the Big 12, Pac-#, or some combination thereof. Do you actually believe these are realistic, or are you just saying that this is what you think should happen?

I proposed it before but brought up again because of discontent within the PAC-12.

On realism: I think the SEC, ACC and Big 10 have clearly separated themselves from the other 2 leagues. I think the PAC and Big 12 will be forced to do something to stay relevant. As I said USC, Texas and Stanford are the keys.

If those three decide to form a breakaway conference it would easily happen.

1) what other option do Washington, Oregon and Arizona have? The bulk of their recruits come from CA.
2) Kansas may go to the Big 10 but they would have to decide quickly so doubt it... btw the MWC used this same approach with SDSU, UNLV and New Mexico.
3) Oklahoma wants to be AAU. To join a conference that is virtually all AAU would be a plus. The SEC and Big 10 won’t take OK State anyway so they at least can tell OK State they have hope.

After that it doesn’t really matter. Likely A&M doesn’t come so I replace them with Houston. Texas Tech or Missouri is a toss up anyway. I could argue Tech is a better get. Same for Nebraska vs Okie State as Nebraska has fallen off a bit. But to answer your question I think A&M is unlikely. I think Missouri would be tempted to join the more prestigious academically conference and restore old rivalries with Kansas and Oklahoma so 50/50. I think Nebraska would think hard about returning to a stable West 16 in a division with Colorado, Kansas and Oklahoma. If I get Missouri and Nebraska perhaps I take Tech over Houston.

(03-18-2018 01:39 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don't see a merger likely at all.

Instead I see teams from both conferences and others leaving to create a new conference intended to monopolize the major college sports market in the Western US

PAC 20 West

Oregon
Washington
California
Stanford
UCLA
Southern Cal
Arizona
Arizona State
Boise
UNLV

PAC 20 East

BYU
Utah
Colorado
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas
Texas
Texas Tech
TCU

Our ideas are basically the same. I just don’t see the need to go beyond 16 nor do I see Houston being left out over New Mexico, Boise State, BYU, UNLV or even Az State.

Utah is not AAU, BTW.

(03-18-2018 04:31 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Utah is not AAU, BTW.

You are correct. My mistake. I like the points pretty much remains the same however. I’m curious, assuming Texas, Stanford and USC want to drive it who do you think says no in the first 13?

East

Nebraska
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech
Utah
Arizona State

West

Washington
Oregon
California
Stanford
USC
UCLA
Colorado
Arizona

Big Ten replaces Nebraska with Iowa State. All Big Ten institutions are now AAU again. Michigan State and Purdue could switch divisions to help with balance.

Nebraska gets access to recruiting states of Texas and California. Colorado retains connections to the West Coast every year. Arizona schools would have a crossover game but state is split for exposure on both ends. It could work.

(03-18-2018 05:30 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 04:31 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Utah is not AAU, BTW.

You are correct. My mistake. I like the points pretty much remains the same however. I’m curious, assuming Texas, Stanford and USC want to drive it who do you think says no in the first 13?

In the first 13 what?

(03-18-2018 05:37 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  East

Nebraska
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech
Utah
Arizona State

West

Washington
Oregon
California
Stanford
USC
UCLA
Colorado
Arizona

Big Ten replaces Nebraska with Iowa State. All Big Ten institutions are now AAU again. Michigan State and Purdue could switch divisions to help with balance.

Nebraska gets access to recruiting states of Texas and California. Colorado retains connections to the West Coast every year. Arizona schools would have a crossover game but state is split for exposure on both ends. It could work.

It might but I have a couple questions.

1) why Utah is the east and Colorado in the West given Colorado is a historical rival with Nebraska and is east of the Rockies?

2) why Arizona State over TCU? The Dallas Metro population (7.2) is greater than the entire state of Arizona (7.1). 4-5 Star Football recruits 47 Texas and 5 Arizona. Travel TCU to Oklahoma 2 hours 37 minutes and TCU to 14 hours 52 minutes? TCU has vastly better athletics.

Lastly I would rather have 4 teams in Texas and one of them in Houston over 2 in Oklahoma but Oklahoma State is understandable.

(03-18-2018 06:05 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 05:37 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  East

Nebraska
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech
Utah
Arizona State

West

Washington
Oregon
California
Stanford
USC
UCLA
Colorado
Arizona

Big Ten replaces Nebraska with Iowa State. All Big Ten institutions are now AAU again. Michigan State and Purdue could switch divisions to help with balance.

Nebraska gets access to recruiting states of Texas and California. Colorado retains connections to the West Coast every year. Arizona schools would have a crossover game but state is split for exposure on both ends. It could work.

It might but I have a couple questions.

1) why Utah is the east and Colorado in the West given Colorado is a historical rival with Nebraska and is east of the Rockies?

2) why Arizona State over TCU? The Dallas Metro population (7.2) is greater than the entire state of Arizona (7.1). 4-5 Star Football recruits 47 Texas and 5 Arizona. Travel TCU to Oklahoma 2 hours 37 minutes and TCU to 14 hours 52 minutes? TCU has vastly better athletics.

Lastly I would rather have 4 teams in Texas and one of them in Houston over 2 in Oklahoma but Oklahoma State is understandable.

1) Colorado fans have talked about having games in California every year so that alumni there can watch them play, also a big reason why they went to the Pac-12 in the first place. Then having an academic division in the West would help soothe feeling with the academic eggheads living there.

The other reason is that I want to split the Arizona schools so that schools in the Southwest and plains can travel to Phoenix every other year, especially alums from Texas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. Just like the Cowboys always loved playing in Phoenix whenever the chance they get in the NFL.

2) To get Nebraska back they may have to agree to take less Texas teams for the Eastern division, in order to not dilute the recruiting too much there. The RRR would still be played, regardless, so it's not like they'd lose much in Dallas. I could make the case for TCU over OK State but unless TCU goes up in academic ranking there is doubt whether a small private school could be admitted. OK State isn't an academic powerhouse, either, but may be necessary to keep the Sooners in the mix. Without the Sooners I don't see the SEC expanding in that area. So it's political as well as athletic.

(03-18-2018 06:27 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 06:05 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 05:37 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  East

Nebraska
Kansas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech
Utah
Arizona State

West

Washington
Oregon
California
Stanford
USC
UCLA
Colorado
Arizona

Big Ten replaces Nebraska with Iowa State. All Big Ten institutions are now AAU again. Michigan State and Purdue could switch divisions to help with balance.

Nebraska gets access to recruiting states of Texas and California. Colorado retains connections to the West Coast every year. Arizona schools would have a crossover game but state is split for exposure on both ends. It could work.

It might but I have a couple questions.

1) why Utah is the east and Colorado in the West given Colorado is a historical rival with Nebraska and is east of the Rockies?

2) why Arizona State over TCU? The Dallas Metro population (7.2) is greater than the entire state of Arizona (7.1). 4-5 Star Football recruits 47 Texas and 5 Arizona. Travel TCU to Oklahoma 2 hours 37 minutes and TCU to 14 hours 52 minutes? TCU has vastly better athletics.

Lastly I would rather have 4 teams in Texas and one of them in Houston over 2 in Oklahoma but Oklahoma State is understandable.

1) Colorado fans have talked about having games in California every year so that alumni there can watch them play, also a big reason why they went to the Pac-12 in the first place. Then having an academic division in the West would help soothe feeling with the academic eggheads living there.

The other reason is that I want to split the Arizona schools so that schools in the Southwest and plains can travel to Phoenix every other year, especially alums from Texas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. Just like the Cowboys always loved playing in Phoenix whenever the chance they get in the NFL.

2) To get Nebraska back they may have to agree to take less Texas teams for the Eastern division, in order to not dilute the recruiting too much there. The RRR would still be played, regardless, so it's not like they'd lose much in Dallas. I could make the case for TCU over OK State but unless TCU goes up in academic ranking there is doubt whether a small private school could be admitted. OK State isn't an academic powerhouse, either, but may be necessary to keep the Sooners in the mix. Without the Sooners I don't see the SEC expanding in that area. So it's political as well as athletic.

Okay. I’m assuming Utah would hate it also. In a 9 game schedule they still travel to CA at least twice a year. I’m expecting most teams would rather travel to Texas than Phoenix but who knows?

I'm assuming the PAC will fail to attract either Texas or Oklahoma. They have more attractive options to the East.

What about TCU and Houston to the PAC? If desired, they're could be a chance to also pick up Kansas and Iowa St.

OPTION 1
NORTH
Washington
WSU
Oregon
OSU
Stanford
Cal
Utah

SOUTH
USC
UCLA
Arizona
ASU
Colorado
TCU
Houston

OPTION 2
WEST
Washington, WSU
Oregon, OSU
Stanford, Cal
USC, UCLA

EAST
Arizona, ASU
Utah, Colorado
TCU, Houston
Kansas, Iowa St.

(03-20-2018 10:52 AM)YNot Wrote:  I'm assuming the PAC will fail to attract either Texas or Oklahoma. They have more attractive options to the East.

What about TCU and Houston to the PAC? If desired, they're could be a chance to also pick up Kansas and Iowa St.

OPTION 1
NORTH
Washington
WSU
Oregon
OSU
Stanford
Cal
Utah

SOUTH
USC
UCLA
Arizona
ASU
Colorado
TCU
Houston

OPTION 2
WEST
Washington, WSU
Oregon, OSU
Stanford, Cal
USC, UCLA

EAST
Arizona, ASU
Utah, Colorado
TCU, Houston
Kansas, Iowa St.

The Pac ain't expanding without UT.

(03-20-2018 11:14 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The Pac ain't expanding without UT.

If true, the PAC isn't expanding.

What does the PAC offer Texas? Less money. Worse TV coverage and exposure. Late kickoff and tipoff times. Greater travel distances and costs. Fewer rivalries. Less-competitive basketball and football (may be this is a positive?). Worse bowl affiliations.

Better academics and better women's soccer and fencing aren't tipping the scales.

Offering Ou, Ok state, KU, and K state is the best option for the pac 12. It destroys the big 12 $ which would than go to the pac and makes it easy for OU and KU to jump with OSU and KSU onboard. Texas would have to do something at that point and the odds are pretty good they join the pac with Texas tech. Than you creat 3 pods of 6 for all sports but football. For football, split the arizonia schools. Pretty easy to incorporate the pac network with those 6 members pairing up into the current system

(03-20-2018 12:18 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Offering Ou, Ok state, KU, and K state is the best option for the pac 12. It destroys the big 12 $ which would than go to the pac and makes it easy for OU and KU to jump with OSU and KSU onboard. Texas would have to do something at that point and the odds are pretty good they join the pac with Texas tech. Than you creat 3 pods of 6 for all sports but football. For football, split the arizonia schools. Pretty easy to incorporate the pac network with those 6 members pairing up into the current system

It is not happening, they are perfectly content with the 12 they have.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(03-20-2018 11:47 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(03-20-2018 11:14 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  The Pac ain't expanding without UT.

If true, the PAC isn't expanding.

What does the PAC offer Texas? Less money. Worse TV coverage and exposure. Late kickoff and tipoff times. Greater travel distances and costs. Fewer rivalries. Less-competitive basketball and football (may be this is a positive?). Worse bowl affiliations.

Better academics and better women's soccer and fencing aren't tipping the scales.

Quite a few things actually.

1) you may not care about academics but College Presidents do and the PAC would be elite.

2) Texas and California offer a population base for TV that would be pretty compelling. Also they are two of the top 3 states for recruiting.

3) if Texas goes SEC or Big 10 the lose all their influence and say in conference matters. If you have Texas and 3 other Texas schools then Texas still has significant say and impact on conference decisions.

For those who know their history, the CA PAC schools have dissolved and reformed their league before. At one point they were in a league with Idaho and Montana. I would fully expect them to re-align their membership to remain an elite conference. Texas also had no problem moving from the SWC the Big 12. Both power groups will likely combine to develop a population power base to rival the other 3. But it will be closer to a merger of equals (trimming the overlap) then 4 schools joining the other.

(03-20-2018 07:01 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(03-20-2018 12:18 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Offering Ou, Ok state, KU, and K state is the best option for the pac 12. It destroys the big 12 $ which would than go to the pac and makes it easy for OU and KU to jump with OSU and KSU onboard. Texas would have to do something at that point and the odds are pretty good they join the pac with Texas tech. Than you creat 3 pods of 6 for all sports but football. For football, split the arizonia schools. Pretty easy to incorporate the pac network with those 6 members pairing up into the current system

It is not happening, they are perfectly content with the 12 they have.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Says who? I am hearing lots of rumbling of discontent. Do you really think USC, Stanford, Cal and UCLA will stand to consistently be 4th or 5th in conference revenue long term?