Good luck with that.

What exactly are the rules now for football conferences. Do they need to play a minimum number of games against each other?

For example let's say WSU and OSU invite 4 schools from the MWC and 4 schools from the AAC. But those 8 schools agree to still play in their old conferences in 2024.

So in 2024 all 8 new teams agree to each play OSU and WSU. So they essentially play 2 conference games in football while OSU and WSU play 9 conference games each. Could that be allowed?

If there’s a war chest being left behind, it’ll have to be utilized to pay for crazy high exit fees to dislodge MWC/AAC schools. Otherwise, there’s zero chance of this happening. Do schools prefer to be associated with the PAC name? Sure. Do they want to be associated with the name at a rate of $18m-35m?! Helllll no. Not even an investment in paying those fees makes sense since such a league would be lucky to crack 7-8m a year in a new media deal in the current landscape (PAC-10 got 20m….)

(09-01-2023 08:55 PM)Comet Wrote:  If there’s a war chest being left behind, it’ll have to be utilized to pay for crazy high exit fees to dislodge MWC/AAC schools. Otherwise, there’s zero chance of this happening. Do schools prefer to be associated with the PAC name? Sure. Do they want to be associated with the name at a rate of $18m-35m?! Helllll no. Not even an investment in paying those fees makes sense since such a league would be lucky to crack 7-8m a year in a new media deal in the current landscape (PAC-10 got 20m….)

No war chest is being left behind. Someone early posted the PAC has no EXIT Fees. https://sports.yahoo.com/inside-pac-12-c...it%20fees.

All that would be left is the CFP which would be about 40 - 50 million over the years for 24 and 25.

The Pac named is ****** beyond salvaging. The quicker the loners realize it, the easier it will be to join the MWC.

Question: if Washington State and Oregon State leave the Pac-12 at this point, do any of the schools (who left before them) have to pay exit fees?

(09-01-2023 09:11 PM)rtist Wrote:  Question: if Washington State and Oregon State leave the Pac-12 at this point, do any of the schools (who left before them) have to pay exit fees?

PAC-12 doesn’t have exit fees.

Joining the MWC and keeping the PAC name is probably the most likely outcome.

IF by some miracle they can convince the top of the MWC/AAC to join them, maybe they put a stranglehold on that #5 CFP spot.

West:
Washington State
Oregon State
Boise State
San Diego State
Colorado State
Fresno State

East:
Memphis
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UAB

Add Gonzaga, St. Mary's, Wichita State, and VCU for Olympics in the West/East.

Would be a very strong hoops conference. Would be a very good football conference.

100% not gonna happen though.

(09-01-2023 08:55 PM)goofus Wrote:  What exactly are the rules now for football conferences. Do they need to play a minimum number of games against each other?

For example let's say WSU and OSU invite 4 schools from the MWC and 4 schools from the AAC. But those 8 schools agree to still play in their old conferences in 2024.

So in 2024 all 8 new teams agree to each play OSU and WSU. So they essentially play 2 conference games in football while OSU and WSU play 9 conference games each. Could that be allowed?

I've found in the rule book that for basketball, you can still get a bid with 6 schools (instead of 7). I wasn't reading the whole thing, but haven't run across anything specifically talking about how the 2 year grace period affects the 8 schools for FBS football. However, I would imagine the CFP committee could write whatever rule they want for access to the CFP.

(09-01-2023 07:12 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  PAC
Washington State
Oregon State
Boise State
Fresno State
San Diego State
Air Force
Tulane
UTSA
Rice
UNLV

AAC
USF
FAU
UAB
Memphis
East Carolina
Charlotte
North Texas
Tulsa
South Florida
Temple
Navy (FB only)
Army (FB only)

MWC
San Jose State
Nevada
Utah State
Wyoming
Colorado State
New Mexico
New Mexico State
UTEP
Hawaii (FB only)

C-USA
Sam Houston State
Louisiana Tech
WKU
EKU (FCS to FBS)
MTSU
Jacksonville State
Kennesaw State
FIU
Liberty

USF and South Florida make good travel partners?

OSU and WSU fill in gaps in the MWC states nicely. Just need to add Arizona and Montana somehow. Then add UTEP to get Texas. That will make a conference that makes geographic sense.

PAC 12: If none of the MWC and AAC schools will move.
UC-Davis
Cal Poly
Sacramento State
Montana
Montana State
Weber State
Northern Arizona
UTEP
OSU
WSU

Then try your best to lure MWC schools.

Gloria should try and build to be the third best FBS conference better than Big 12 and ACC by trying to grab the best strong schools they can get with OSU and WSU.

(09-01-2023 09:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 08:55 PM)goofus Wrote:  What exactly are the rules now for football conferences. Do they need to play a minimum number of games against each other?

For example let's say WSU and OSU invite 4 schools from the MWC and 4 schools from the AAC. But those 8 schools agree to still play in their old conferences in 2024.

So in 2024 all 8 new teams agree to each play OSU and WSU. So they essentially play 2 conference games in football while OSU and WSU play 9 conference games each. Could that be allowed?

I've found in the rule book that for basketball, you can still get a bid with 6 schools (instead of 7). I wasn't reading the whole thing, but haven't run across anything specifically talking about how the 2 year grace period affects the 8 schools for FBS football. However, I would imagine the CFP committee could write whatever rule they want for access to the CFP.

I wonder if this Pac-12 rebuild is code for something else that they're doing. For example, when USC & UCLA began their talks with the B1G, they (USC & UCLA) claimed that they were looking at going indy. When Oregon & Washington began their negotiations with the B1G, they claimed that they were trying to "help" the conference get a tv deal. Colorado didn't really say much of anything, IMO, until they were ready to act. Utah, Arizona, & ASU also used the conference negotiations cover. So, I wonder what OSU & WSU are trying to telegraph??? Hmmmm.

(09-01-2023 09:38 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  PAC 12: If none of the MWC and AAC schools will move.
UC-Davis
Cal Poly
Sacramento State
Montana
Montana State
Weber State
Northern Arizona
UTEP
OSU
WSU

Then try your best to lure MWC schools.

Gloria should try and build to be the third best FBS conference better than Big 12 and ACC by trying to grab the best strong schools they can get with OSU and WSU.

If Oregon St. and Washington St. refused to join MWC and added these teams then they’d deserve their fan base leaving them to die athletically.

(09-01-2023 09:39 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 09:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 08:55 PM)goofus Wrote:  What exactly are the rules now for football conferences. Do they need to play a minimum number of games against each other?

For example let's say WSU and OSU invite 4 schools from the MWC and 4 schools from the AAC. But those 8 schools agree to still play in their old conferences in 2024.

So in 2024 all 8 new teams agree to each play OSU and WSU. So they essentially play 2 conference games in football while OSU and WSU play 9 conference games each. Could that be allowed?

I've found in the rule book that for basketball, you can still get a bid with 6 schools (instead of 7). I wasn't reading the whole thing, but haven't run across anything specifically talking about how the 2 year grace period affects the 8 schools for FBS football. However, I would imagine the CFP committee could write whatever rule they want for access to the CFP.

I wonder if this Pac-12 rebuild is code for something else that they're doing. For example, when USC & UCLA began their talks with the B1G, they (USC & UCLA) claimed that they were looking at going indy. When Oregon & Washington began their negotiations with the B1G, they claimed that they were trying to "help" the conference get a tv deal. Colorado didn't really say much of anything, IMO, until they were ready to act. Utah, Arizona, & ASU also used the conference negotiations cover. So, I wonder what OSU & WSU are trying to telegraph??? Hmmmm.

Mystery solved, I think. OSU & WSU are trying to tell ESPN that they want to be in an ESPN conference, not a Fox conference, IMO.

(09-01-2023 09:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 08:55 PM)goofus Wrote:  What exactly are the rules now for football conferences. Do they need to play a minimum number of games against each other?

For example let's say WSU and OSU invite 4 schools from the MWC and 4 schools from the AAC. But those 8 schools agree to still play in their old conferences in 2024.

So in 2024 all 8 new teams agree to each play OSU and WSU. So they essentially play 2 conference games in football while OSU and WSU play 9 conference games each. Could that be allowed?

I've found in the rule book that for basketball, you can still get a bid with 6 schools (instead of 7). I wasn't reading the whole thing, but haven't run across anything specifically talking about how the 2 year grace period affects the 8 schools for FBS football. However, I would imagine the CFP committee could write whatever rule they want for access to the CFP.

PAC still has a vote in CFP, and believe at least until 2026, any changes would require unanimous approval. Less clear to me how the mechanics and voting would work after that with a new contract. I'd suspect they can't just take away the PAC's vote or CFP membership if the conference survives.

CFP Ranking Committee could choose not to rank them highly I suppose, depending on what their schedule and record looks like. Declaring them ineligible is likely a different matter.

Its also possible PAC's share of CFP payout could be leveraged to help with conference exit fees for other schools the next 2 years. P5 conference distributions are much higher than G5 distributions currently.

(09-01-2023 08:50 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 08:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 07:54 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 07:13 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(09-01-2023 07:00 PM)LatahCounty Wrote:  You guys are way too pessimistic about the continued existence of a PAC. If there's any lesson from 60 years of realignment, it's that colleges live for excuses to separate themselves from "lesser" schools. This is another opportunity to do that. Schools will take it.

They get a 2 year grace period. They don't even have to be a real conference until 2026. They'll figure it out.

They have no TV deal at all and have a grand total of 4 games on their schedules for next year. Time is running out fast. Are they going to play each other 5-6 times a season and have no TV deal at all for 2 years? That’s silly stuff.

Several times in the past decade or so, a school has had to slap together a hasty indy schedule on short notice. Every time it happens, a chorus on this board screams "THEY'LL NEVER GET A SCHEDULE TOGETHER!!!!!!!"

And then they do. The schedule usually sucks, but it's 12 FBS-compliant games. If UConn can do it, and NMSU can do it, and Liberty can do it, then so can Wazzu and OSU. If it's a bridge to 2026, they'll figure it out.

NMSU and Liberty had two years, OSU and Wazzu have less than 12 months. UConn is a better example, they had 12 months to put a schedule together, and I was very skeptical that they'd pull it off.

Looking back at CSNBBS threads, they had 9 games announced by the end of October, with a mystery ACC game that they couldn't announce yet.

I'd argue they'd have a much easier time than UConn. For one thing, they can play each other. Twice. For another, they'd only go that route if they were reasonably confident they have schools moving in to join them in 2025 or later. One would think those incoming schools would do what they move dates to accommodate their future conference mates for 2024. Only so many more dates to fill.

Or, again, just don't play an FBS-compliant 2024 schedule.

Stanford and Cal each just had a spot on their calendar open up, moving to the 8-game ACC. They can probably hold a palm out to departing Pac members to drop MW opponents so that they get 2 opponents for each game.

I actually think a scheduling agreement with the MW happens before sheer independence. OSU and WSU get a full regular season. The MW may get access to Pac bowls. Eh, this just sounds like a merger with OSU and WSU getting 2 years of parachute payments.

(09-01-2023 07:20 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  I hope no MWC schools are dumb enough to fall for this charade. All they have to do is remain united and ultimately OSU and WSU will have to agree to work with them as a group.

Normally I wouldn't have any confidence in any group of schools to work together for their common interest -- history has shown that conference realignment doesn't work that way -- but Nevarez is a smart commissioner and if anyone can successfully herd the cats it's probably her.

MW will remain United--which is easier when you do not have much to gain.

(09-01-2023 08:07 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  ... No, exit fee assistance would come out of this years' PAC-12 budget. There's no way for OSU and WSU to tap into that money -- if they don't spend it, it goes to the departing schools. ...

But then what if the departing schools don't persist in the courtesy of not voting on PAC-12 affairs and vote the proposal down?

Unless you can point to a bylaw in the PAC-12 bylaws that says that departing members lose a vote if the departure is scheduled for August 2, 2024 or later.

Getting the Comcast debt paid this year might be doable, because Comcast would chase the current members to get the debt if it is not paid off.

Spending down the distribution to pay for members for 2024 ... that's their income this year being spent for somebody else's benefit. I think they play by the letter of the law and vote that down.

(09-01-2023 09:31 PM)jarmzet Wrote:  OSU and WSU fill in gaps in the MWC states nicely. Just need to add Arizona and Montana somehow. Then add UTEP to get Texas. That will make a conference that makes geographic sense.

I don’t think UTEP will go West ever again. That’s my personal opinion but realignment has taught me for the last 20 years to expect the unexpected so I wouldn’t rule anything out.

Would a Pac-12/14/16 with Oregon State, Washington State along with MWC schools be ideal for UTEP and even NMSU long term? Sure! But the problem is those same MWC schools have been rejecting UTEP since 1998 so they’ll do anything in their power to keep the status quo. I accepted that reality years ago and it’s fine. Time to move on.

C-USA will be UTEP’s home for a long time.

.