Save the Pac?
Comments
-
TCU has SOME interest in the DFW marketCanadawg said:
Fair enough you may be right but adding TCU would solve thatAtomicDawg said:
West Texas is its own market and nothing like San Antonio Austin Houston Dallas.Canadawg said:
That's not how tv works. If there are PAC teams in Texas then the PAC games will be on TV in texasntxduck said:
Texas tech is more in the New Mexico footprint than where the Texas blue chips are atCanadawg said:All of the geographic issues with the PAC are also its strengths in situations like this. You think USC would ever have balls to pull a Texas move? I dont.
In 2020 over 15% of the blue chips came from the existing PAC footprint. Keep in mind there are less than 20% of the total P5 teams in the PAC. Obviously the conference needs to keep them out west but ill ignore that for the moment.
If the PAC adds okie state and for instance TexTech that would immediately open up another over 15% of the total blue chips in Texas to the footprint.
If the PAC adds no one I don't think it will drastically be negative. If they add the Texas footprint they could come out in a decent situation compared to the BIG and ACC. This is obviously moot if there is some kind of super conference (dissolving the ACC) put together out east.
Tech has very little influence on the major markets.
Just because a game is on doesn’t mean ppl watch. Networks know this also.
That interest is still behind Texas, Oklahoma, and TAMU
That’s just FACTS -
That's...fine? It's more about playing there and general interest in the PAC being increased.
I'm aware the recently G5 team is not regarded the same as Texas -
the new conference realignment will provide west coast, primarily local kids in their markets an opportunity to play CFB that in the old model might not have had the opportunity. It's really win-win for everyone, more inclusive and aligns with the values of the University.
-
-
Joining an all AAU conference is probably the only way UW would ever leave WSU behind. We won't leave them for financial or football reasons, but academis arrogance might just be enough to move the needle.rodmansrage said:
FYFMFE -
Maybe only AAU affiliation schools should be allowed to play football? What a bunch of effing elitist snobs.
https://www.aau.edu/who-we-are/our-members
This is what football needs - research institutes dictating football leagues
-
That is some great thinking, fellow AAU graduate. No one blames the kids for wanting access to better academic conferences.dnc said:
Joining an all AAU conference is probably the only way UW would ever leave WSU behind. We won't leave them for financial or football reasons, but academis arrogance might just be enough to move the needle.rodmansrage said:
FYFMFE -
Pretty sure Oregon CARES enough about football to make the move and drop Boov regardless, but in UW's case this might be the necessary pitch to break up with Cuog.RatherBeBrewing said:
That is some great thinking, fellow AAU graduate. No one blames the kids for wanting access to better academic conferences.dnc said:
Joining an all AAU conference is probably the only way UW would ever leave WSU behind. We won't leave them for financial or football reasons, but academis arrogance might just be enough to move the needle.rodmansrage said:
FYFMFE -
C
How dare do these educational institutions prioritize their original intention (cough and bigger revenue stream) over a cool football conference?LebamDawg said:Maybe only AAU affiliation schools should be allowed to play football? What a bunch of effing elitist snobs.
https://www.aau.edu/who-we-are/our-members
This is what football needs - research institutes dictating football leagues
If you read nothing else read this about research to understand it’s value: Phil Knight recently cut a check to Oregon for a new research campus that is more than all the combined money he has given the athletic department.
The research institute dictated Big Ten seems to be doing okay. They make more money from athletics than any other conference. The University of Michigan spends $180 million on their athletic department. Their research spending is $1.7 billion. 15 years of athletics revenue at UW is equal to one year of research expenditure.
The presidents of universities are academics/administrators. They tend to care about things like... academics and budgets. Even if they are huge football fans (they’re usually not) they like to base the future of their school on things other than fun football games. Don’t get me wrong, they care to the extent they have to care - which varies wildly from school to school. -
Going to the Big 10 eh?greenblood said:I’d prefer UW, UO, USC, and UCLA just rush to the Big 10.
Texas A&M, Okie St, Nebraska, and TCU aren’t saving this conference.
SC and UCLA would never do that. They’d be better off Independent in the new landscape, should the PAC fall. And then the big picks are UW and UO.
One school actually cares about Sport. The other doesn’t. Despite their research University credentials that seem to be so important.
When the cards tumble, I could see the big fish making their own de facto “Independent” conference.
Rather easily.
