Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Jim Johnson]

57 minutes ago, WoolyBully said:

Out of all the stuff that's been floated, I think the above scenario looks to be the most reasonable. 

And yet, it's not feasible in time.  SDSU, Boise, and Fresno are not paying $34 million each joining for 2024.

Which means we KNOW it's not gonna happen. 

They will need to add four or five teams from AAC, C-USA, or Sun Belt.  Why?  Much much lower exit fees... all of those teams are available for 2024.  Adding four teams to get to eight conference members means seven conference games in 2024, and five non-conference games.

That PAC 12 played nine conference games, so even with eight teams, the Pac 4 would need to find two more OOC games each (eight more total) -- and that can be difficult with one-years notice.  Plus the four teams they add all have to find a fifth non-conference game (four more total).  Are there 12 teams who need to add a game to 2024?

[Cat941]

6 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

What about the exorbitant exit fees for SDSU, Boise State, and Fresno State for 2024? He didn’t address that issue. He either doesn’t know about it or think it’ll otherwise get addressed.

Maybe the PAC will play without SDSU, BSU and FSU until 2025.   Just add 3 AAC now and apply for the waiver for less than 8 teams. 

[TallyBull]

2 minutes ago, Cat941 said:

Maybe the PAC will play without SDSU, BSU and FSU until 2025.   Just add 3 AAC now and apply for the waiver for less than 8 teams. 

Seems odd to leave us out. NO isn’t that much farther from Tampa by air. But whatever, everything is speculation at this point. 

[WoolyBully]

I don't see a lot of good solutions for CalFord. Those are smart-kid schools, stuck out west. I wonder how Stanford views the idea of being independent, like their old drinkin' buddies at Notre Dame? Why would I want to wing across the continent for the sake of a ball game unless I'm getting mega-paid to do so? When we speculate on joining the AAC, how is that fundamentally different than just waiting to merge with the select schools of the MWC? Nope, complicated times in Berkeley & Palo Alto. 

[Peatearpan]

14 minutes ago, WoolyBully said:

I don't see a lot of good solutions for CalFord. Those are smart-kid schools, stuck out west. I wonder how Stanford views the idea of being independent, like their old drinkin' buddies at Notre Dame? Why would I want to wing across the continent for the sake of a ball game unless I'm getting mega-paid to do so? When we speculate on joining the AAC, how is that fundamentally different than just waiting to merge with the select schools of the MWC? Nope, complicated times in Berkeley & Palo Alto. 

Yea, it really seems like it would be easier for Stanford to go Indy and the other three to go to the MWC.

Also, isn’t August 15th the deadline for FSU/Clemson to notify the ACC with their intent to leave (if they are at all).

Edited August 13, 2023 by Peatearpan
Added more stuff

[TallyBull]

Here’s the rest of the tweet, not included above:

[Triple B]

2 hours ago, Cat941 said:

 

 

2 hours ago, WoolyBully said:

Out of all the stuff that's been floated, I think the above scenario looks to be the most reasonable. 

Agree ..... except the additional qualifier where he cites, "IF the Pac-4 stays put, expands, here’s a potential lineup (on-field/academics/geography)"

[flsportsfan83]

1 hour ago, TallyBull said:

What about the exorbitant exit fees for SDSU, Boise State, and Fresno State for 2024? He didn’t address that issue. He either doesn’t know about it or thinks it’ll otherwise get addressed.

Thats why they join in 2 years. Take enough from aac to get to 8 next year.

[Cat941]

I've been going back and thinking about the idea of SMU offering to forgo revenue for 5 years just to get into the ACC.  I don't like it, as in a way it furthers the idea that G5 teams are not valuable and that they should have to pay their way in to realignment.  G5 teams already make huge concessions in realignment.  Look at what the B12 did by giving Colorado and others a full share, versus the 4 non-P5 additions taking partial revenue shares.  

If the PAC opts to add SMU, Tulane and Rice only from the AAC, I think it's a mistake, but maybe a dodging a bullet moment for us.  The future of CFB is unwritten.  NIL, transfer rules, building the OCS and other issues are influential on our success.  Maybe as important as conference affiliation in the changing landscape of CFB.  At least for a while a path to the playoffs exists for USF and other G5 teams.  

 

Edited August 13, 2023 by Cat941
ETA

[WoolyBully]

2 minutes ago, Cat941 said:

At least for a while a path to the playoffs exists for USF and other G5 teams.  

Yep, but is that enough? How much of this is taking inches when we really want miles? Is it just access to the playoffs, or do we really want to be on the good side of the velvet rope? How long would we be satisfied lounging about the AAC? Would another decade be palatable? The reason I think along these lines is due to the incredible inventory of college football teams in existence and the growing chasm between the haves and have nots. I can't envision any sort of miracle that will narrow that gap or suddenly leverage a G5 to be on par with P(x). It's not like "Oh, this P5 school joined our conference, so that makes us a P5 conference. Now, where's my chair?".