The PAC had already turned down four LARGER Big 12 brands. Given that, the idea that a smaller brand like UH would have been invited strains the limits of credulity.
Wasn’t going to happen. That ranks right up there with “UH turned down an invite to the SEC” theory that some here believe. Uhhhhh…no it didn’t. Because it never received one.
And as for the four brands you mentioned, even assuming, just for sake of argument, that that was even a hypothetical possibility, what YOU fail to realize is that two of them (Kansas and UH) are among the smallest brands in college football.
Neither would have been additive, only subtractive. And you’d be splitting up the crappy PAC TV deal that has been proposed for the current ten teams, FOUR MORE WAYS, without increasing the pot in all likelihood.
That makes it EVEN WORSE. An EVEN SMALLER TV deal.
Given that…you theory is simply implausible. NO WAY would it have been a better deal for UH after USC/UCLA departed if we went to the PAC. It must, almost out of logical necessity, have been worse. Four more teams, none of which is additive, dividing up a crappy PAC TV deal.
That’s what everyone here except you, Acres, and possibly BigCat already have figured out. And that’s why most of us never had any desire to see that happen, even if it were a possibility, which it wasn’t.
Not sure why you three haven’t caught on.
Good thing we went to the Big 12 instead and don’t have to worry about being stuck in the craptastic PAC.
Could it have happened? This is material if we’re talking about options, though not if we’re talking about hypotheticals. It’s often unclear which we are talking about, but no such invitation was extended so it’s ultimately all hypothetical. Whether we wish such an invitation had existed.
Which two or four schools would have gone? This makes a difference as to whether it would have been a better deal or not. Some groupings are more realistic (or less unrealistic) than others,
If we assume the aforementioned hypothetical, which group would be preferable:
Group A: Oregon, Washington, Oregon State, Washington State, Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado. (In this scenario, the Big 12 is Group B plus 2-4 more G5 schools)
Group B: Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech (or TCU), Baylor, WVU, UCF, Cincinnati, and BYU (In this scenario… well we live in this scenario so the Pac is the Pac.)
It’s largely a matter of speculation (Would the Pac-14 lose more teams to the Big Ten? Will the Big 12 be able to pilfer Pac-12 schools?). Those who talk about G5 additions as though they are generally trash because of the PR and label (any P5 is better than any G5, etc), though, should prefer A because the only G5 program that involves is us. If want to kneecap other P5 conferences, then you should probably prefer A because it would do more damage to the Big 12 than B does to the Pac-12 (unless more schools jump). Those who believe that the Pac-12 is going to fold and/or that we will be able to grab from the ACC down the line should prefer B.
For my part, I am perfectly fine with either. What I like most about the Big 12 over the Pac-14 is that it is the more stable conference. But if the four schools went left, then it would be the more stable conference. So I am neither wistful of the alternate timeline where we are in the Pac-14, but also don’t think we especially dodged a bullet provided that there are four and we are one of them.
(If the Pac-12 had only taken UH and TCU, as one rumor went, then the Pac-12 could have been vulnerable and things could have gone very badly for us. We’d basically be right there with Oregon State and Washington State hoping like hell that the Pac-12 holds together. I’d be getting ulcers.)
Here’s my thought and ill use Tulane as an example…no doubt a large portion of New Orleans football fans are LSU fans and not Tulane fans, but Tulane has been saddled as a G5, AAC school, and even before that they utterly sucked in football before that. But if Tulane had the ability to source 35 to 50 million in G5 revenue, have revelent schedules, exposure, perhaps command more of the New Orleans market. I mean hell, im kind of a Green Wave fan and i live in Ashland Kentucky.
Did any news about Gonzaga addition after the latest B12 meeting come out ?
Feels like some UH fans are moving toward “Tulane T-Shirt” fans.
UH v Tulane history. All the Willie Fritz v Dana rabble rousing.
Tulane FB could be good for awhile & sometimes AAC is all thats on.
The rest of the AAC is easy to dislike or care nothing about if you are all about UH.
If UH v UTSA is over after 2023 then I see the same.
Yes because a) two of the four brands they added would be among the smallest in the P5, b) you’d now be splitting the already crappy 10 team PAC pot up 14 ways, with little additive value, only dilutive value.
Remember, the proposed PAC ten team deal is already lower than the future Big 12, and it would be even smaller per team with four of the smaller brand teams coming on board.
So just imagine how bad THAT would be. FAR WORSE than the Future Big 12.
Hey listen, it was never a possibility, but even if it were, for the reasons mentioned, it would NOT have been better. Just worse.
You’ve never realized that when the LA schools left, they took nearly HALF of the PAC’s media value with them.
Adding four more smaller brand teams, two of which are VERY small brands, would NOT make that up.
Blue blood defined as what?? Biggest stadium? Loud mouth know nothings always predicting them to do better than they DO? OU was a blue blood, but stumbled bad the last 2 years…Texas? PLEASE…The last 20 years, TCU and Kansas State have been bluer than Texas ever dreamed about being…and the last 10 years, so has Baylor, EVEN with a terrible scandal to overcome, which they did…
by blue blood, i presume you mean winning, because thats the only thing thats important…Everything else is wind in the trees. Big 12 has great balance and lots of good programs in football and BB…We dont need OUT and they can feel free to hit the SEC road whenever as long as they pay us first…
They dont wish to pay so here they stay, for 2 more years…I look forward to all the whippings they will take from all their “friends” in Big 12…for 2 more years
Oddly I get a UCF vibe from UTSA. They have the excitement at ground level to make exponential leaps in brand value. Great fans, exciting metro venue, big city, relatively easy to fly out of. And the campus is nice.
Lots more competition in DFW compared to San Antonio. UTSA in in a particularly good spot because they have the city to themselves (excluding statewide schools).
The Pac-12 and ACC have better top brands than we do but recent history suggests having your value concentrated among a couple schools is not necessarily such a good thing and building a conference around it is risky.
Big 12’s value spreads across all the schools, which actually is increases safety.
If you have a wallet that has two twenties and six fives, and other that has eight tens, the twenties doesn’t make the wallet with less money more valuable.
You still aren’t answering the question or your logic is flawed.
The TWO overwhelming biggest brands in the Big 12 (UT & OU) left and the Big 12 back filled with FOUR G5 level schools yet their value didn’t plummet as everyone predicted.
They added those 4 to a Conference with TWO Flagship Universities (KU & WVU) but both are in small states. The rest are second or further public schools or private schools
The current PAC, even without USC & UCLA maintains the following State Flagship Universities:
Colorado
Arizona
California
Washington
Oregon
Utah
Then they would ADD Three Big 12 Schools…Most likely One more Flagship (Kansas) and large public in the state of Texas (Texas Tech), a secondary public (Oklahoma State) and, for the sake of this argument, the University of Houston.
You are delusional if you think the current Big 12 has more value than that PAC configuration.
…and the kicker is that IG USC and UCLA left, they could easily add two more (TCU or San Diefo State or BYU or Kansas State or Iowa State) to get to 16.
The Big 12 can’t do that without 1) adding more G5s or 2) praying the PAC crumbles.
Again, I am a member of the Big 12 so I 100% want the Big 12 to raid and kill the PAC but had the PAC raided the Big 12 and also added UH, that would have been best the best scenario for the University of Houston and there is no argument against it.
The Power Conferences would have gone form 5 to 4 and UH would be included.
2 Texas P5 schools would have been demoted to G5 plus 5 other Big 12 schools.
UC and UCF and BYU would have never gotten the bump up.
We’d have a HUGE recruiting advantage just on those items.
Chicago State is making the move ?
South Side will be a unique location for college football.
Everyone wants in on the lower FBS gravy train.
Lots of players in Chicago Land and nearby.
Kickoff off party/press conference video looked like fun.
Any location that could recruit a decent D3 team on bicycles (for Ex: UT-Arlington) should never, ever drop football.
After the next PAC TV deal it’s not a reach that Wash State and Oregon State calls them to rebuild.
B12 is going to boom. Anyone in the PAC with an institutional brain will want in.
Rebuilt PAC w best of AAC and MWC still has value.
Its a large % of whatever games are available in the West. Just less desirable games.