Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[John Lewis]

34 minutes ago, Cat941 said:

But a source with knowledge of the discussions said the Big Ten did not have serious conversations about adding Florida State, and its top priority remains Notre Dame.

They'll be waiting a very long time for that.

[Bull Matrix]

30 minutes ago, belgianbull said:

I really don't believe WVU being irrelevant in sports has anything to do with the amount of travel. Probably has everything to do with coaching.

And really what is an hour and a half more to fly to Boise State or Stanford compared to SMU and Tulsa.

 

Football is not as bad since they only play about 6 road games and once a week. The other sports it gets tough. However it is a trade off. Would WVU be happy winning in the AAC and getting paid less?? I doubt it. They would jump at an invite in a heartbeat. But that will probably never come due to the Va schools blocking that. 

[Bull Matrix]

2 minutes ago, John Lewis said:

They'll be waiting a very long time for that.

Exactly. FSU to big ten makes little sense to me due to the travel. They would fit in better in the SEC if they ever decided to expand 

[Mission9]

39 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

I would take Memphis over Rice every day of the week and twice on Sunday, but it seems this is an academic/market thing. 

I realize for most of you it is ancient history, but besides the academic profiles, all four mentioned at one time played in what are now referred to as "power" conferences. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by Mission9

[Cat941]

Little concerned that the B12 will add OSU and WSU (and all the PAC assets) if Stanford and Cal find homes and leave them as the last survivors. It would kill the PAC and benefit the B12.  I know, they're supposedly done in conference realignment.  But I don't believe 'em.   They've been causing USF pain for > a decade.  

[Rocky Style]

Even if we get into the PAC, I imagine the propaganda will just keep saying P4 and will us out of existence.

[bull2saintleo]

46 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

FWIW

 

Honestly the more I think about it, a 9 team PAC-AAC for 2024 would make more sense for football scheduling.  Finding a 5th OOC game on short notice (without it being an FCS school) would be challenging.  Most teams likely have 4 OOC's already scheduled so a 9 team conference with 8 conference games would be a plus.

[Rocky Style]

11 minutes ago, Cat941 said:

It would kill the PAC and benefit the B12.  I know, they're supposedly done in conference realignment.  But I don't believe 'em.   They've been causing USF pain for > a decade.  

Yes, B12 Hates USF.

[Rocky Style]

44 minutes ago, Peatearpan said:

Athletically and market size, yes. Academically, no. 
 

On Memphis. are we pretending that academics matter anymore on the Helter Skelter CFB plan?

[TallyBull]

7 minutes ago, Rocky Style said:

Even if we get into the PAC, I imagine the propaganda will just keep saying P4 and will us out of existence.

Not if Stanford and Cal are in the conference. They clearly have the sympathy of many presidents and ADs, and our best shot (imperfect as it is) would be to hitch our wagon to them. I think if the PAC rebuilds there will still be a de jure P5 but a de facto P2. So we'd be as much a "P5" as the Big 12 and the ACC, perhaps not earning as much money as them, but also not part of the "P2." 

And even with respect to the "P2," contraction is coming down the road...  Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois, Rutgers, etc. won't be able to mooch off of the brand names forever.