Yeah. I think the only way that could happen would be creation of a new conference - merger of select Pac, B12, MWC and potentially AAC schools to create something new which would get max value.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Pac-12 Expansion Preferences
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
BUFFS14
Well-Known Member
If its all about the money and the PAC, B12, ACC are all somewhat close in value. What sense does it make to have 1 large new conference? By creating 1 large conference I dont see how that increases any value.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
San Diego State is the only no brainer in my opinion. I'd be alright stopping with them.
Always BUFF
I post stupid ****
That's a good scenario because all four would take a lesser cut of the new TV money.
If we wanted to go to Houston, we'd have to settle for Rice which I don't think is feasible at this point.
Rice, the Pac12 safety school.
Because you would only be inviting the schools that increased value versus paying for legacy members who do nothing for you. For example, you don't need KSU if you already have KU so that becomes 1 share instead of 2. At the end of the day, you end up with the best brands and greatest overall home market value by cherry picking the 12-24 best football properties of what's available & dividing that pie for the maximum revenue per school.
I'd argue that getting a Dallas-Ft Worth school into the conference along with SDSU would be much better than just SDSU. While there's no replacing USC & UCLA when it comes to branding, having SDSU and SMU might be close enough to offset the loss of the LA market if you look at it from a numbers viewpoint.
We need to move on SMU before the Big 12 thinks about inviting them to lock down DFW as that area will become the third largest metro area in the next decade behind NYC & LA. I believe people would prefer TCU and I'd do that as well but I don't think TCU would just leave the Big 12 at this point. I'd hate to be stuck with having to pick up UNT for the Pac-12 since the Big 12 had both TCU & SMU. Notable DFW players that played for either the Buffs or Broncos are Von Miller and LaViska Shenault to begin with...that needs to be a recruiting priority for the Buffs going forward.
SMU's football stadium which seats 32K, on its Wikipedia page, is expandable to 45K which will be sufficient for the Pac-12.
I'm starting to convince myself that we should go after SMU first before SDSU.
If ESPN gets the Pac 12 rights for all but tier 3, this is exactly what is happening.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
ESPN's going to be driving the bus on expansion. They're going to want the Pac in Socal. They have the three biggest brands in Texas (Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma). San Diego State and if we have to take a 12th team......Fresno. Pass on Boise.
FM-Buff
Well-Known Member
****. I forgot about BYU.
Gimme Houston, TCU, SDSU, BYU for all sports. Zags and St Mary’s for non-football.
I want to say BSU due to football credibility and their higher likelihood of creating a national-interest Tier 1 game.
But UNLV is a dramatically larger home market, brackets Los Angeles metro with SDSU, and a lot of folks I've read suggest that WSU plus the Portland media market from our OR schools already delivers the Boise TVs. Plus, for scheduling, BSU is MTZ while UNLV has the advantage of being PTZ.
Why not both plus Fresno State as a 14-team conference? Fully surround LA, get 3 good football programs, claim the Sacramento market since we'd surround it too, and fwiw in hoops we'd be adding 4 of the biggest home arenas in the west (UNLV seats 17.9k, FSU 15.6k, BSU 12.6k, and SDSU 12.4k). And none of them would command a full revenue share for the first 5 years of the deal.
The only thing that makes sense financially is the creation of an entirely new conference including selected members of the ACC, B12, and PAC. In the process of forming the new conference all three jettison the dead weight that decreases their value.
The new conference would offer multiple teams with a history of being top 25 teams, even if some are temporarily down. This would include FSU, Miami, UNC, WVU, Okie State, Kansas State, Utah, Oregon, Washington, etc. This would have value to the TV networks that simply expanding the PAC (or the B12 or ACC) would not give.
Done right the conference ends up with 16-20 teams covering all time zones and including some interesting rivalry games.
All of the other suggestions I have been seeing here result in a lot more pieces coming out of a pie that doesn't get much bigger resulting in smaller pieces for existing members.
ESPN is now backed into a corner so the P12 can tell ESPN to take that offer or they won’t have any college football out west besides BYU.
Problem with Frenso is they have let their stadium fall into disrepair and they haven’t pumped money into the stadium for a long time.
SMU on the other hand has all those well off boosters who can pump money into the athletic department. They just haven’t had the good run of head coaches that TCU has had since Dennis Franchoise which has led TCU to the Big 12.
Dallas versus Frenso…no way Frenso wins that battle.
I don't think 60 is enough for football.
If I was creating a top tier of football programs, I think I'd end up with 72 teams (3 conferences x 24 members).
And I'd probably end up with a P4 for non-football by expanding & re-working the Big East into a national conference of 24 members.
For basketball, 96 would allow you to play 4 massive conference tournaments followed by a Dance of 32. Enough for all other college sports, too.
From an entertainment standpoint you are correct but the big money programs don't want to divide the money like that.
In the end I'm expecting football to be 30-40 and eventually that number dropping a few. Football drives the money but they will want the money they see going to the MBB tourney as well.
With MBB take the football schools and add another 15-30 teams ending up at 60 or below. These would include Big East Schools, Gonzaga, and some of the schools that have been left out of football but have strong draws in basketball like Kansas.
What if we are a leftover?
If our administration doesn't screw it up there is no chance.
We are a national brand with alums all over the country. Even as bad as we have been our games draw respectable ratings.
The only question is if our administration is willing to play at that level or if they want to cure cancer and pretend like we are the University of Chicago.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Yeah this is ESPN and FOX dividing the sport up amongst themselves. The SEC is an ESPN league. Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma are the three biggest brands in the state of Texas, and ESPN will have them all starting in 2025. FOX OTOH has no presence in Texas whatsoever, so I'd figure they'd want the Big 12. Houston-Baylor probably outdraws Kentucky-Auburn and definitely outdraws Iowa-Purdue in markets like Dallas and Houston. ESPN has nothing on the West Coast-and the Pac has the two best brands still on the market in UO and UW. They'll tell the Pac to take SDSU. They may stop there......but SMU won't be the 12th.
Always BUFF
I post stupid ****
If Rice enters the conversation of expansion SMH.
Always BUFF
I post stupid ****
Here's the problem...CU has become a 25 yr leftover with a great mascot and view and nothing else.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
They're a culture fit!
Yeah. I don't think TX teams to the Pac move the needle much for ESPN due to its SEC property. At least not in a vacuum.
However, I could see them play some defense by wanting to move the B12's DFW & Houston market assets into the Pac in order to cut the value available to FOX in TX.
Similarly, imagine a Pac-16 which added SMU & UH for the reasons above plus gutting FOX's MWC value with SDSU, FSU, BSU and UNLV.
That would put ESPN in a very strong position other than in Chicagoland. (And a Big East deal would keep them locally relevant to the college sports world on that front.)
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
San Diego State we have to have. That's going to happen IMO. Boise's too small. UNLV? Meh-I could probably give you three Pac 10 schools with huge alumni groups in Vegas already in both Arizona schools and Utah. If you can shop from the Big 12, you do it-but I'm not betting on that because I expect FOX to scoop up their rights. They'll want some kind of presence in Texas.
I did some research on Boise and I have to agree. Small market (state & metro) and it's been a long time since they were performing at an elite level.
For a Pac-12, it's got to be SDSU & UNLV.
For a Pac-14, it would have to be grabbing the DFW and Houston markets.
Wildcard for a Pac-16 would be FSU (CA Central Valley has more population than Seattle + Portland) & BYU. Could also go KU instead of BYU, which would make a lot of academic folks happy.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
I'd honestly grab San Diego State and Fresno and call it a day. UNLV I don't think brings anything we wouldn't already have, and they're a low priority in Vegas. I'll believe Big 12 schools move when I see it.
FSU has neglected infrastructure, both athletically and with lagging academics.
UNLV has great trajectory as a university, city and on facilities. Set up to do very well in the NIL era with the boosters it can tap.
Both have their drawbacks, so we'd be betting here. I'd put my money on UNLV over FSU for where I think each will be in a decade.
Plus, even though it's irrelevant to the decision, it matters to me to have Las Vegas as a travel destination over Fresno. It's so much better to add SD & LV versus other western options.