Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[hm101]

 

 

[hm101]

Looks like the Pac whatever may stay together after all? 

What a ride

[Bull94]

15 minutes ago, puc86 said:

 

I agree that if things are set up where there is an opportunity for a prize for the tallest midget then ending up with the record that does not jeopardize that is the preferred outcome so that you can actually position yourself for something of value. 

I also recognize that the MWC is going to be a firm contender for that one spot for the five minutes that it will exist and that with continued expansion and a budget arms race that the P5 will need the whole pie and decide the 14th team in the country needs that spot more than the 25th team that has the 100th toughest schedule in the country. 

The games themselves are not valuable and if winning is all that matters no matter how low the competition, why not move down as far as possible and get the easiest path? (because no one actually believes that)

 

the only reason programs are moving up is for the money. Pac 12 has been around for like 100 years.

Guess who that benefits?

All those bloated salaries at the top.The ones making the decision to move up for more money.

Larry Scott, the former pac 12 commissioner, made over $50M in the 11 years he ran that conference.

Athletic directors and coaches now make many multiples of what school presidents make and they make a ton.

This entire grab for more money only benefits them.

Like I said fans of many of the programs that have moved up have been fooled to think it somehow benefits them.

Look at the results on the field before and after they moved.

Of course no one in charge will ever want to move down for less money.

ask WVU fans whether their time in the Big East or Big 12 was more memorable

I'm not opposed to moving up but I don't think it's some huge benefit.

there are tradeoffs.

Edited August 4, 2023 by Bull94

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, hm101 said:

 

 

I think the most fun part about a game with no rules is not knowing what it is that you are supposed to be cheering for and whether or not whatever you randomly pick to cheer for will be positively or negatively impactful to you. 

[TallyBull]

3 minutes ago, hm101 said:

At this point I'm just confused about whether I should be rooting for or against the PAC-12 to exist. I don't really care that much either way, although I can say that a lot of Big 12 people on Twitter seem pretty obnoxious and it wouldn't hurt my feelings if they took an L or two. 

It seems the only meaningful shot USF has at moving up is the PAC-12 sticking together (thereby making any kind of merger arrangement less likely) and an ACC collapse. But despite all the bluster come out of Tallahassee, I just don't see that happening. People are usually loudest when they don't have a legal basis for their arguments. The hope is that by being loud, they build leverage, and get their opponents to reconsider their legal positions and come to a settlement. If I were the ACC, I'd call FSU's bluff, because by all accounts that GOR is solid. FSU is saying that it was sold on signing the GOR based upon fraudulent numbers, and that is the reason they think they can get out. But if that's true, they'll need to prove it, which will cost FSU time and money, and there's no certainty of success. 

The only other option is for a critical mass of ACC schools to depart (8 or more?) and thus dissolve the conference. I actually think this is the better way out, but they'll need an awful lot of cooperation by member institutions. So this would be tough, too. 

[Mike Stuben]

3 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

At this point I'm just confused about whether I should be rooting for or against the PAC-12 to exist. I don't really care that much either way, although I can say that a lot of Big 12 people on Twitter seem pretty obnoxious and it wouldn't hurt my feelings if they took an L or two. 

It seems the only meaningful shot USF has at moving up is the PAC-12 sticking together (thereby making any kind of merger arrangement less likely) and an ACC collapse. But despite all the bluster come out of Tallahassee, I just don't see that happening. People are usually loudest when they don't have a legal basis for their arguments. The hope is that by being loud, they build leverage, and get their opponents to reconsider their legal positions and come to a settlement. If I were the ACC, I'd call FSU's bluff, because by all accounts that GOR is solid. FSU is saying that it was sold on signing the GOR based upon fraudulent numbers, and that is the reason they think they can get out. But if that's true, they'll need to prove it, which will cost FSU time and money, and there's no certainty of success. 

The only other option is for a critical mass of ACC schools to depart (8 or more?) and thus dissolve the conference. I actually think this is the better way out, but they'll need an awful lot of cooperation by member institutions. So this would be tough, too. 

I get torn on who to root for too, but I know this. What we don't want is an ACC PAC merger of some sort, because that probably eats up lots of landing spots for us. 

[puc86]

5 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

the only reason programs are moving up is for the money. Pac 12 has been around for like 100 years.

Guess who that benefits?

All those bloated salaries at the top.The ones making the decision to move up for more money.

Larry Scott, the former pac 12 commissioner, made over $50M in the 11 years he ran that conference.

Athletic directors and coaches now make many multiples of what school presidents make and they make a ton.

This entire grab for more money only benefits them.

Like I said fans of many of the programs that have moved up have been fooled to think it somehow benefits them.

Look at the results on the field before and after they moved.

Of course no one in charge will ever want to move down for less money.

ask WVU fans whether their time in the Big East or Big 12 was more memorable

I'm not opposed to moving up but I don't think it's some huge benefit.

there are tradeoffs.

Some people actually enjoy moving up and being more competitive in life. 

Would you rather skip on an offer to Harvard because you would possibly get a 3.0 GPA and you don't want to jeopardize your state school 4.2 GPA? 

Would you rather stay the CEO of a small business than a VP at Apple?

Have the biggest house in your neighborhood or the smallest house in Tiger Woods neighborhood?

 

[michibull]

5 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

 

It seems the only meaningful shot USF has at moving up is the PAC-12 sticking together (thereby making any kind of merger arrangement less likely) and an ACC collapse

I don’t think we want a “collapse”; I think we just want FSU and Clemson to go to the SEC and the ACC to add USF and UCONN. I believe this would be ideal for us. 

[KB]

This may have already been stated, but how is it that the B12 and B1G want to raid these PAC 12 schools because of their value, but as a conference together they have no value?

[John Lewis]

54 minutes ago, Bull Matrix said:

I mean the way the playoffs were only 4 schools. They should have had more playoff spots. The P5 gets preferable treatment compared to the AAC. I don’t think they would have won the playoffs but I think college football is not good to only have 4 playoff spots 

Agreed about that. It would have been nice to see what UCF could have done in a 12 team playoff that season.