Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[belgianbull]

13 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

So that means we keep the 6+6 format for at least the next three years? If that's the case, not sure there's that big of an advantage to the MWC to a reverse merger in terms of CFP access (I understand that there would be other advantages/revenues). The AAC will still be the sixth-best conference, unless something crazy happens and we're overtaken by CUSA or the Sun Belt, which seems very unlikely to me. Am I reading that right?

 

with SMU gone, and if the AAC is not looking Westward, in a few years it would be a good time to look to add two teams to the AAC, to reinforce our best of the rest status. Perhaps wait to see what teams from those conferences separate themselves from others. Marshall, Appalachian State, WKU, Toledo, Liberty,... perhaps should be options if they keep winning. Don't want to be in a situation  where we win the conference, but get outranked by one of those teams for the playoffs,

Edited September 7, 2023 by belgianbull

[Jim Johnson]

26 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

So that means we keep the 6+6 format for at least the next three years? If that's the case, not sure there's that big of an advantage to the MWC to a reverse merger in terms of CFP access (I understand that there would be other advantages/revenues). The AAC will still be the sixth-best conference, unless something crazy happens and we're overtaken by CUSA or the Sun Belt, which seems very unlikely to me. Am I reading that right?

 

It might go to 5-7 with the new Mountain-PAC not getting the automatic bid and competing with AAC for that last auto-qualifier slot.  I don't think that change would be controversial, it's the revenue distribution that would be -- PAC gets $79M per year for three more years; MWC/AAC/SBC/C-USA/MAC split $103M five ways.

[CousinRicky]

44 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

Just a note -- it's not a bond.  It's a loan.

The differences are:

1. Bonds require issuance by the Florida State Board of Administration.  They cannot be easily refinanced.
2. Loans are just a form of contract, which only requires Board of Governors approval.  They can easily be refinanced.

So if we default on the loan they'll come take the stadium away?  Hmmm.  Do these trucks come in a larger size?

[TallyBull]

5 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

It might go to 5-7 with the new Mountain-PAC not getting the automatic bid and competing with AAC for that last auto-qualifier slot.  I don't think that change would be controversial, it's the revenue distribution that would be -- PAC gets $79M per year for three more years; MWC/AAC/SBC/C-USA/MAC split $103M five ways.

So that'll be the fight then. Here's hoping that Aresco is up to the task! 

But to clarify, in the meantime (the next three years), we're staying at 6-6? And because of that, the merged PAC/MWC doesn't really have an access advantage over the AAC - is that right?

Edited September 7, 2023 by TallyBull

[Jim Johnson]

6 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

But to clarify, in the meantime (the next three years), we're staying at 6-6? And because of that, the merged PAC/MWC doesn't really have an access advantage over the AAC - is that right?

I don't know that is certain.  We know the Big 10 and SEC want just the top 12 with no automatic qualifiers starting in 2024... the 5-7 model (top 5 champions and 7 at large) might be the compromise.

[TallyBull]

14 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

I don't know that is certain.  We know the Big 10 and SEC want just the top 12 with no automatic qualifiers starting in 2024... the 5-7 model (top 5 champions and 7 at large) might be the compromise.

Understood, thanks. But that 5-7 compromise would begin, at the soonest, in three years, right - that's my question? Because we're locked in to 6-6 for the next three years (unless there's unanimous approval to do otherwise, which won't happen).

[Jim Johnson]

14 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

Understood, thanks. But that 5-7 compromise would begin, at the soonest, in three years, right - that's my question? Because we're locked in to 6-6 for the next three years (unless there's unanimous approval to do otherwise, which won't happen).

No ... I am saying it would begin in 2024.  The CFP committee started meeting last week.

[Triple B]

3 hours ago, TallyBull said:

I look forward to seeing the ponies get pummeled every year by Wake and Duke (not to mention FSU and Clemson). 

It’s been mentioned already but SMU had the buying players routine down when it was illegal ….

[TallyBull]

7 minutes ago, Triple B said:

It’s been mentioned already but SMU had the buying players routine down when it was illegal ….

Yeah. Different time. FSU and Clemson can buy a few players, too...

[TallyBull]

20 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

No ... I am saying it would begin in 2024.  The CFP committee started meeting last week.

Thought I'd read that we were locked into 6 AQ + 6 at large for a few years. Thanks for the correction.

FWIW here's a relevant article with some good background:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/how-a-shrinking-pac-12-could-alter-the-selection-process-for-the-the-12-team-college-football-playoff/