So is if going to an alliance or is pac 12 going to expand I guess we find out in a couple of weeks
Does it have to be one or the other? Could it be both?
I think, for the time being, this is how the conferences get out of expansion.
If they don’t expand, the state of Texas will have zero interest in a PAC/B1G/ACC alliance because zero schools would be from Texas.
The PAC needs to expand into Texas…actually helps the Alliance.
I don’t disagree. Just think this will be their version of “doing something” without doing anything major.
This is exactly what I was thinking. Each has technically expanded by the size of the other two conferences. And…because no one on the West Coast is interested in watching Rutgers or no one in Ohio is interested in watching Washington State, the Alliance will probably only play the best draw against the best draw. Win-win for all three. They expand without having to split any of their payouts.
This is a click bait article. It is a waste of time. This is not directed at you TexOHCoog.
The rodent via finestinkbomb tries to spin the “real” following article located at:.
If the PAC expands, it will be contrary to their financial interests. Here’s why. UH plays 12 games per season in the PAC/OOC. Unless we are playing USC or Oregon, the numbers will be about 1 million, which tracks with the Big 12 and PAC 12 numbers for games not involving marquee teams. Look it up.
So, to give us even $24 million per year, advertisers need to spend $2 million per game. That’s $2 per viewer. Remember, similar numbers caused Fox and ESPN to pass on a new Big 12 deal before the Texas/OU defections.
I hope I’m wrong, but we let ourselves get strung out over expansion every time it comes up.
From my understanding the Alliance has nothing to do whether ea or any of these 3 Confs expand etc. The purpose is when voting on any particular agendas, etc these 3 will be aligned together to squash some of Power the SEC has built w shift of UT/OK . Kinda like NATO
The alliance is their move right now. Think about it. Does bringing in UH and TT and all the matchups that implies help them $$$ more or does a couple nationally broadcast matchups a year with name brands like USC vs Penn State, Oregon vs Miami, Wisconsin vs UCLA, or Michigan vs Florida State help them more? The alliance could be as simple as each team is committed to scheduling 1 game per year with a team in one of the other conferences. The conference commissioners, networks and ADs decide who plays who to ensure some appealing matchups - think a system kinda like in the NFL where division winners play division winners to get better matchups - it could even be open ended with a spot in the schedule reserved with matchup TBD based on current program strengths/desired matchups at the time, etc… Sure Indiana can go ahead and play Colorado for all we care but lets see USC vs Penn State or Oregon vs Miami to make some real cheddar.
I feel like we have a pretty good history of playing p12 schools. It just seems to me like it fits perfectly. Other than Colorado seems like we’re played many p12 schools.
Correct this is another move that they hope will build out of it… kinda like in Basketball where 2 Confs have a pact to play ea other with several gms during Non-Conf time.
This make sense . However, this is the same argument the BIG12 made six years ago in not expanding. Then the big bad wolf came looking for the fattest calves.
Sooner or latter the big bad wolf will become hungry and set its sight straight at the pac12.
Possibly the Cali schools could split off to BIG and leave others like Colorado, Arizona, ASU, Oregon State, WSC behind but I wouldn’t necessarily count on it. Remember the Big 12 is the newest conference and its glue has always been the commitment of OU and UT and that is it. I don’t see apples to apples here but if I am a lower tier team in PAC I do have that thought in the back of my mind and an expansion is likely to be neutral to slightly positive for my position - but is USC and Fox or WSC and Colorado calling the shots ya know?
Tom, if USC, Oregon and whoever get poached from the PAC, it won’t be because the conference wasn’t large enough. It’ll be for those B1G dollars. The remaining teams aren’t worth much, just like the remainders of the Big 12. You are correct.
The PAC isn’t going to announce everyone needs to just STFU and leave them alone. They will meet and deliberate and talk to accountants and consultants and psychics to give the appearance of careful and measured consideration. They conclude that Texas and OU (mostly Texas) added value while everyone else was worthy (strictly PR), but a financial drag. Then we can have a few threads expressing outrage that they led us on, or they are blind to the potential, or they are scared of the competition, culture, you-name-it. Can’t wait for those.
Some relevant quotes:
Right now, the alliance is about philosophy, and the reality is that the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12, which prioritize academic profile and an expansive set of Olympic sports, don’t overlap much with universities like [West Virginia] and [TCU]
That article literally downgraded the Big12 to G5 status. Wow!