Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[John Lewis]

28 minutes ago, GoBulls84 said:

I don't think it will be more than the Big 12 is getting, but it should be close enough that none of the PAC schools are going to be interested in jumping ship to a conference with a far worse academic prestige.

It will be very interesting to see what the number is when all is said and done.

Does adding SDSU, and potentially SMU, push the PAC 12 over the Big XII number?

[Peatearpan]

4 minutes ago, michibull said:

I think between the PAC 12, Big 12 and ACC, they will be more focused on staying together and weather any storm the B1G and SEC create. I don’t see them over expanding in an effort to get ahead of the curve as that will dilute the payouts to current schools. If there is any advanced expansion, it would be to 14 so they can maintain 12 if the big 2 come calling. That said, the PAC 12 would look at BSU and SDSU or UNLV, Big 12 would look at USF and Memphis/SMU/UNLV (USF being 1st priority for the obvious reasons). The ACC I think is just trying to hold together and won’t do anything unless schools leave. The reality is that GOOD G5 school options are almost dried up now, so it’s slim pickings. I see us getting a Big 12 invite before the ACC only because I think once Texas and Oklahoma leave, they will expand by 2 one more time. This is just my thoughts, no insider information at all. 

If B12/PAC stay put:
 

ACC would definitely want Notre Dame.

Long Shot additions: Tulsa to get a foot in Oklahoma, UAB for similar reasons, Tulane (same thing), SMU, UConn, Memphis

Extremely long shot additions: Temple, Marshal

[John Lewis]

Everyone wants Notre Dame.

The only issue is that they literally have 0% interest in moving to a conference if they have their own TV deal, which will get done with their new AD being a former NBC executive, and if they have access to the playoff, which is much easier now with 12 teams.

[Bull Matrix]

1 hour ago, GoBulls84 said:

I don't think it will be more than the Big 12 is getting, but it should be close enough that none of the PAC schools are going to be interested in jumping ship to a conference with a far worse academic prestige.

Think whoever agreed to pay the big 12 that tv money should be fired. I don’t think their next deal will be as good. ACC I been hearing rumors that they will be getting a bump in their tv contracts starting in 2026…

[GoBulls84]

51 minutes ago, John Lewis said:

It will be very interesting to see what the number is when all is said and done.

Does adding SDSU, and potentially SMU, push the PAC 12 over the Big XII number?

I think SDSU and SMU would help them maintain up to that number. I still don't think either is enough to push them above the Big 12 number (mostly because I'm surprised the Big 12 is getting as much as they're getting and I don't think the streaming entities that are being rumored with the PAC will go quite as high).

27 minutes ago, John Lewis said:

Everyone wants Notre Dame.

The only issue is that they literally have 0% interest in moving to a conference if they have their own TV deal, which will get done with their new AD being a former NBC executive, and if they have access to the playoff, which is much easier now with 12 teams.

Agreed. Notre Dame knows their the prize catch at this point. And as long as media companies are willing to give them upwards of $50, $60, or $70 mill annually, they have zero incentive to officially join a conference for football, especially with the expanded field.

[Bull Matrix]

Funny hearing SMU being thrown around due to their location. They can’t draw flies to their football games but I guess that matters little these days 

[GoBulls84]

2 minutes ago, Bull Matrix said:

Funny hearing SMU being thrown around due to their location. They can’t draw flies to their football games but I guess that matters little these days 

Maybe not attendance-wise, but they have deep pockets, #72 nationally as a university, and as far as viewership goes, they averaged almost 150% of the viewership San Diego State did (who everybody seems to agree is a shoe-in if the PAC expands). With the decline in cable TV subscriptions, at some point it's going to be about straight up viewership and not how many cable boxes are in an area and SMU does, at the very least, *decent* in terms of viewership

[michibull]

7 minutes ago, GoBulls84 said:

Maybe not attendance-wise, but they have deep pockets, #72 nationally as a university, and as far as viewership goes, they averaged almost 150% of the viewership San Diego State did (who everybody seems to agree is a shoe-in if the PAC expands). With the decline in cable TV subscriptions, at some point it's going to be about straight up viewership and not how many cable boxes are in an area and SMU does, at the very least, *decent* in terms of viewership

Agreed, expansion at this point is going to be limited and not just based on football attendance and wins, much more is being taken into account since the power G5 teams are already in a P5 conferences; it gonna be more for growth and potential and market. 

[UCF_rustbucket]

5 hours ago, Bull Matrix said:

I do believe they still will have a tie in to the Rose Bowl and that to me is priceless. Now if we would of he heard rumors that the Rose Bowl was discontinuing their relationship with the PAC 12 then I would be worried for them 

That tie in will be gone for the most part. At least in the way it exists today. Once the CFP expands to 12, it'll be look like this:

 

Round 1: 5-12 seeds playing at high seeds home stadium

Round 2: 1-4 seeds plus 4 winners of round 1 playing in 4/6 of the NY6 bowl locations 

Round 3: semi finals at the remaining 2 NY6 bowls

Round 4: CFP final at bid location 

 

I'm sure for round 2 they'll try schedule the locations based on what goes well with the match ups so there will be some PAC Rose bowl reunions. But that means it's no longer guaranteed to be PAC vs B1G during non semifinal hosting years like it is in the current 4 team CFP. The Rose bowl was fighting this but they had no leverage because all the other NY6 were on board. So if they sat out just because they really wanted PAC v B1G, they'd be excluding themselves from a highly ranked matchup and would've ended up with some like like the PAC 2/3 vs the B1G 3/4 instead of the champ v champ matchups of the past.

Edited July 20, 2023 by UCF_rustbucket

[Brad]

One rather heinous member of the media is now saying that the PAC12 won't announce their media deal on Friday now.