[82lsju]

I still think that eventually there will be two super conferences based around today's Big 10 and SEC that will be for football (and maybe men's basketball) with other "conferences" for all the other sports.  Those two super conferences will look remarkably similar to the AFC and NFC in structure with probably 20 or 24 teams in each super conference.  The biggest thing the Pac-X has going for it now is 7pm-8pm PT TV inventory, which I think USC and UCLA home games will provide a lot of for the Big 10 in the coming years.

[82lsju]

I still think that eventually there will be two super conferences based around today's Big 10 and SEC that will be for football (and maybe men's basketball) with other "conferences" for all the other sports.  Those two super conferences will look remarkably similar to the AFC and NFC in structure with probably 20 or 24 teams in each super conference.  The biggest thing the Pac-X has going for it now is 7pm-8pm PT TV inventory, which I think USC and UCLA home games will provide a lot of for the Big 10 in the coming years.

[lex24]

Replace them with SDSU.

[lex24]

Replace them with SDSU.

[OutsiderFan]

Replace them with SDSU.

From Stewart Mandel in TA:

The Pac-12’s inability to nail down its deal sooner has all but assured the Aztecs won’t be able to join before 2025, lest they have to pay the Mountain West double their exit fee. Plus, as of media day on Friday, there were at least two schools still opposed to expansion, per two league sources. One would think they’ll reconsider that stance now, though this being the Pac-12, never gamble on it acting rationally.

I don't see the end of the world with a 9-team conference for one year and SDSU joining a year later. But, you have to ask yourself if SDSU adds even as much value as Colorado.

[OutsiderFan]

Replace them with SDSU.

From Stewart Mandel in TA:

The Pac-12’s inability to nail down its deal sooner has all but assured the Aztecs won’t be able to join before 2025, lest they have to pay the Mountain West double their exit fee. Plus, as of media day on Friday, there were at least two schools still opposed to expansion, per two league sources. One would think they’ll reconsider that stance now, though this being the Pac-12, never gamble on it acting rationally.

I don't see the end of the world with a 9-team conference for one year and SDSU joining a year later. But, you have to ask yourself if SDSU adds even as much value as Colorado.

[Maple Leaf]

Looking forward let's say 4 to 6 years I would like to see what the impacts on the student athletes at SC and UCLA are both academically and physically. Ok a slide in academics won't be an issue at SC, but not so at UCLA.  The real issue is the physical issue on how the players perform and how much time they miss playing.  And what happens if the players start saying no to all the travel, and follow up with a lawsuit?  Some interesting chemistry involved with expanded travel demands, NIL, transfer portal, academics, and post playing days employment opportunities.

[Maple Leaf]

Looking forward let's say 4 to 6 years I would like to see what the impacts on the student athletes at SC and UCLA are both academically and physically. Ok a slide in academics won't be an issue at SC, but not so at UCLA.  The real issue is the physical issue on how the players perform and how much time they miss playing.  And what happens if the players start saying no to all the travel, and follow up with a lawsuit?  Some interesting chemistry involved with expanded travel demands, NIL, transfer portal, academics, and post playing days employment opportunities.

[Giants]

Replace them with SDSU.

From Stewart Mandel in TA:

The Pac-12’s inability to nail down its deal sooner has all but assured the Aztecs won’t be able to join before 2025, lest they have to pay the Mountain West double their exit fee. Plus, as of media day on Friday, there were at least two schools still opposed to expansion, per two league sources. One would think they’ll reconsider that stance now, though this being the Pac-12, never gamble on it acting rationally.

I don't see the end of the world with a 9-team conference for one year and SDSU joining a year later. But, you have to ask yourself if SDSU adds even as much value as Colorado.

I don’t think most of the conference membership would agree with you.  Once Colorado makes it official, I would expect the Arizona’s to begin looking for a new home.  If either or both of them leave, the conference will be left with: 

two schools dressed up in their Sunday best hoping to attract a high-powered suitor
two schools that believe their academic ranking precludes the need to submit an application for admission to another conference (believing that ranking speaks for itself) 
two schools that are doomed to banishment to the MWC
one school that doesn’t know what it wants

What a mess…..

[Giants]

Replace them with SDSU.

From Stewart Mandel in TA:

The Pac-12’s inability to nail down its deal sooner has all but assured the Aztecs won’t be able to join before 2025, lest they have to pay the Mountain West double their exit fee. Plus, as of media day on Friday, there were at least two schools still opposed to expansion, per two league sources. One would think they’ll reconsider that stance now, though this being the Pac-12, never gamble on it acting rationally.

I don't see the end of the world with a 9-team conference for one year and SDSU joining a year later. But, you have to ask yourself if SDSU adds even as much value as Colorado.

I don’t think most of the conference membership would agree with you.  Once Colorado makes it official, I would expect the Arizona’s to begin looking for a new home.  If either or both of them leave, the conference will be left with: 

two schools dressed up in their Sunday best hoping to attract a high-powered suitor
two schools that believe their academic ranking precludes the need to submit an application for admission to another conference (believing that ranking speaks for itself) 
two schools that are doomed to banishment to the MWC
one school that doesn’t know what it wants

What a mess…..

[82lsju]

Looking forward let's say 4 to 6 years I would like to see what the impacts on the student athletes at SC and UCLA are both academically and physically. Ok a slide in academics won't be an issue at SC, but not so at UCLA.  The real issue is the physical issue on how the players perform and how much time they miss playing.  And what happens if the players start saying no to all the travel, and follow up with a lawsuit?  Some interesting chemistry involved with expanded travel demands, NIL, transfer portal, academics, and post playing days employment opportunities.

in football assuming the Big 10 stays at nine conference games, that means USC and UCLA will have at least four road games a year at least as far away as Nebraska (and every other year USC will have five if they continue to play ND).  I wonder if some of these games will get scheduled back-to-back and if the team will stay "on the road" for the week between games like some west coast NFL teams do for back-to-back east coast games (and of course they can do classwork virtually on the road)

and USC and UCLA home games are the new 7pm PT (or later) Big 10 inventory so I'd expect non-marque games to end up in that time slot

this is one reason I think that eventually there will be two football super conferences with "divisions" to create less travel.

will be interesting to see if in the future either schedule non-conference games in the eastern time zone

other sports except for basketball are just hosed for travel if they do compete in a full Big 10 schedule

[82lsju]

Looking forward let's say 4 to 6 years I would like to see what the impacts on the student athletes at SC and UCLA are both academically and physically. Ok a slide in academics won't be an issue at SC, but not so at UCLA.  The real issue is the physical issue on how the players perform and how much time they miss playing.  And what happens if the players start saying no to all the travel, and follow up with a lawsuit?  Some interesting chemistry involved with expanded travel demands, NIL, transfer portal, academics, and post playing days employment opportunities.

in football assuming the Big 10 stays at nine conference games, that means USC and UCLA will have at least four road games a year at least as far away as Nebraska (and every other year USC will have five if they continue to play ND).  I wonder if some of these games will get scheduled back-to-back and if the team will stay "on the road" for the week between games like some west coast NFL teams do for back-to-back east coast games (and of course they can do classwork virtually on the road)

and USC and UCLA home games are the new 7pm PT (or later) Big 10 inventory so I'd expect non-marque games to end up in that time slot

this is one reason I think that eventually there will be two football super conferences with "divisions" to create less travel.

will be interesting to see if in the future either schedule non-conference games in the eastern time zone

other sports except for basketball are just hosed for travel if they do compete in a full Big 10 schedule

[OutsiderFan]

From Stewart Mandel in TA:

The Pac-12’s inability to nail down its deal sooner has all but assured the Aztecs won’t be able to join before 2025, lest they have to pay the Mountain West double their exit fee. Plus, as of media day on Friday, there were at least two schools still opposed to expansion, per two league sources. One would think they’ll reconsider that stance now, though this being the Pac-12, never gamble on it acting rationally.

I don't see the end of the world with a 9-team conference for one year and SDSU joining a year later. But, you have to ask yourself if SDSU adds even as much value as Colorado.

I don’t think most of the conference membership would agree with you.

This is an opinion based on a scenario I didn't propose. The Pac can survive in a 9 then 10 team (SDSU) scenario. This requires the Arizonas to stay put. If they don't, it is the end of the world.

The Pac conference should just disband and leave its former members to cut their own deals at this point. It's time to put this "Bernie Lomax" conference out of its misery.

[OutsiderFan]

From Stewart Mandel in TA:

The Pac-12’s inability to nail down its deal sooner has all but assured the Aztecs won’t be able to join before 2025, lest they have to pay the Mountain West double their exit fee. Plus, as of media day on Friday, there were at least two schools still opposed to expansion, per two league sources. One would think they’ll reconsider that stance now, though this being the Pac-12, never gamble on it acting rationally.

I don't see the end of the world with a 9-team conference for one year and SDSU joining a year later. But, you have to ask yourself if SDSU adds even as much value as Colorado.

I don’t think most of the conference membership would agree with you.

This is an opinion based on a scenario I didn't propose. The Pac can survive in a 9 then 10 team (SDSU) scenario. This requires the Arizonas to stay put. If they don't, it is the end of the world.

The Pac conference should just disband and leave its former members to cut their own deals at this point. It's time to put this "Bernie Lomax" conference out of its misery.

[Goose]

I don’t think most of the conference membership would agree with you.  Once Colorado makes it official, I would expect the Arizona’s to begin looking for a new home.  If either or both of them leave, the conference will be left with: 


two schools dressed up in their Sunday best hoping to attract a high-powered suitor

two schools that believe their academic ranking precludes the need to submit an application for admission to another conference (believing that ranking speaks for itself) 

two schools that are doomed to banishment to the MWC

one school that doesn’t know what it wants



What a mess…..

Utah knows what it wants, or more precisely, what it doesn't want. It doesn't want to be part of the Big-12. It also doesn't want to be part of the MWC or anything like that. Been there, done that, grew out of it. Unfortunately, what they want, a reversion to the status quo ante the USC/UCLA defection, is not available. This leaves them no acceptable choice.

Some version of the PAC-12 may survive (no matter how far the TV money falls) because for most schools there won't be a "landing spot" available. Washington and Oregon will probably have to wait a while to get in the Big-10, and during that time a lot of things in college football will change. I think the conferences that are in "good shape" (SEC and Big-10) may just take a "time out" and see what happens before they add/shed members. It is all about the money for them, and dividing a fixed or shrinking pot among more members isn't a "good deal".

How many "new" members the Big-12 will take is up in the air. Arizona really wants to land what may be the last available slot. One of their worries is that the state legislature will mandate that ASU and UofA play in the same conference. Colorado, Utah, UofA and ASU may make a "good" package deal from the Big-12's point of view, but that choice isn't high on Utah's list and I don't think ASU would consider that an "improvement" either. UofA is just scared they will be left out of any conference at all.

[Goose]

I don’t think most of the conference membership would agree with you.  Once Colorado makes it official, I would expect the Arizona’s to begin looking for a new home.  If either or both of them leave, the conference will be left with: 


two schools dressed up in their Sunday best hoping to attract a high-powered suitor

two schools that believe their academic ranking precludes the need to submit an application for admission to another conference (believing that ranking speaks for itself) 

two schools that are doomed to banishment to the MWC

one school that doesn’t know what it wants



What a mess…..

Utah knows what it wants, or more precisely, what it doesn't want. It doesn't want to be part of the Big-12. It also doesn't want to be part of the MWC or anything like that. Been there, done that, grew out of it. Unfortunately, what they want, a reversion to the status quo ante the USC/UCLA defection, is not available. This leaves them no acceptable choice.

Some version of the PAC-12 may survive (no matter how far the TV money falls) because for most schools there won't be a "landing spot" available. Washington and Oregon will probably have to wait a while to get in the Big-10, and during that time a lot of things in college football will change. I think the conferences that are in "good shape" (SEC and Big-10) may just take a "time out" and see what happens before they add/shed members. It is all about the money for them, and dividing a fixed or shrinking pot among more members isn't a "good deal".

How many "new" members the Big-12 will take is up in the air. Arizona really wants to land what may be the last available slot. One of their worries is that the state legislature will mandate that ASU and UofA play in the same conference. Colorado, Utah, UofA and ASU may make a "good" package deal from the Big-12's point of view, but that choice isn't high on Utah's list and I don't think ASU would consider that an "improvement" either. UofA is just scared they will be left out of any conference at all.

[Giants]

I don’t think most of the conference membership would agree with you.  Once Colorado makes it official, I would expect the Arizona’s to begin looking for a new home.  If either or both of them leave, the conference will be left with: 


two schools dressed up in their Sunday best hoping to attract a high-powered suitor

two schools that believe their academic ranking precludes the need to submit an application for admission to another conference (believing that ranking speaks for itself) 

two schools that are doomed to banishment to the MWC

one school that doesn’t know what it wants



What a mess…..

Utah knows what it wants, or more precisely, what it doesn't want. It doesn't want to be part of the Big-12. It also doesn't want to be part of the MWC or anything like that. Been there, done that, grew out of it. Unfortunately, what they want, a reversion to the status quo ante the USC/UCLA defection, is not available. This leaves them no acceptable choice.

Some version of the PAC-12 may survive (no matter how far the TV money falls) because for most schools there won't be a "landing spot" available. Washington and Oregon will probably have to wait a while to get in the Big-10, and during that time a lot of things in college football will change. I think the conferences that are in "good shape" (SEC and Big-10) may just take a "time out" and see what happens before they add/shed members. It is all about the money for them, and dividing a fixed or shrinking pot among more members isn't a "good deal".

How many "new" members the Big-12 will take is up in the air. Arizona really wants to land what may be the last available slot. One of their worries is that the state legislature will mandate that ASU and UofA play in the same conference. Colorado, Utah, UofA and ASU may make a "good" package deal from the Big-12's point of view, but that choice isn't high on Utah's list and I don't think ASU would consider that an "improvement" either. UofA is just scared they will be left out of any conference at all.

The Big 12 wants AZ but not ASU.  I agree that politics may play a role in “who can do what”.

I also agree that Utah wants to turn the clock back.  Given their alternatives, it is a tough time to be a Ute.

Yep, UW and UO are also in a bad position.  Why should schools like Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern and Illinois vote to admit a new member if it means slicing the pie into more pieces? (adding more money to the TV contracts because two new members are joining the conference is not going to happen).  
 
The Pac12 Presidents/ Chancellors made a very bad decision in 2019 when they didn’t accept ESPN’s offer to take over the P12 network (incl. a GOR agreement)  The end result of that decision - UCLA and USC walking and now the potential break-up of the conference.  The schools that have been left in the dust have no one to blame but themselves…..

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Jo...Pac12.aspx

[Giants]

I don’t think most of the conference membership would agree with you.  Once Colorado makes it official, I would expect the Arizona’s to begin looking for a new home.  If either or both of them leave, the conference will be left with: 


two schools dressed up in their Sunday best hoping to attract a high-powered suitor

two schools that believe their academic ranking precludes the need to submit an application for admission to another conference (believing that ranking speaks for itself) 

two schools that are doomed to banishment to the MWC

one school that doesn’t know what it wants



What a mess…..

Utah knows what it wants, or more precisely, what it doesn't want. It doesn't want to be part of the Big-12. It also doesn't want to be part of the MWC or anything like that. Been there, done that, grew out of it. Unfortunately, what they want, a reversion to the status quo ante the USC/UCLA defection, is not available. This leaves them no acceptable choice.

Some version of the PAC-12 may survive (no matter how far the TV money falls) because for most schools there won't be a "landing spot" available. Washington and Oregon will probably have to wait a while to get in the Big-10, and during that time a lot of things in college football will change. I think the conferences that are in "good shape" (SEC and Big-10) may just take a "time out" and see what happens before they add/shed members. It is all about the money for them, and dividing a fixed or shrinking pot among more members isn't a "good deal".

How many "new" members the Big-12 will take is up in the air. Arizona really wants to land what may be the last available slot. One of their worries is that the state legislature will mandate that ASU and UofA play in the same conference. Colorado, Utah, UofA and ASU may make a "good" package deal from the Big-12's point of view, but that choice isn't high on Utah's list and I don't think ASU would consider that an "improvement" either. UofA is just scared they will be left out of any conference at all.

The Big 12 wants AZ but not ASU.  I agree that politics may play a role in “who can do what”.

I also agree that Utah wants to turn the clock back.  Given their alternatives, it is a tough time to be a Ute.

Yep, UW and UO are also in a bad position.  Why should schools like Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern and Illinois vote to admit a new member if it means slicing the pie into more pieces? (adding more money to the TV contracts because two new members are joining the conference is not going to happen).  
 
The Pac12 Presidents/ Chancellors made a very bad decision in 2019 when they didn’t accept ESPN’s offer to take over the P12 network (incl. a GOR agreement)  The end result of that decision - UCLA and USC walking and now the potential break-up of the conference.  The schools that have been left in the dust have no one to blame but themselves…..

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Jo...Pac12.aspx

[81alum]

Looking forward let's say 4 to 6 years I would like to see what the impacts on the student athletes at SC and UCLA are both academically and physically. Ok a slide in academics won't be an issue at SC, but not so at UCLA.  The real issue is the physical issue on how the players perform and how much time they miss playing.  And what happens if the players start saying no to all the travel, and follow up with a lawsuit?  Some interesting chemistry involved with expanded travel demands, NIL, transfer portal, academics, and post playing days employment opportunities.

in football assuming the Big 10 stays at nine conference games, that means USC and UCLA will have at least four road games a year at least as far away as Nebraska (and every other year USC will have five if they continue to play ND).  I wonder if some of these games will get scheduled back-to-back and if the team will stay "on the road" for the week between games like some west coast NFL teams do for back-to-back east coast games (and of course they can do classwork virtually on the road)

and USC and UCLA home games are the new 7pm PT (or later) Big 10 inventory so I'd expect non-marque games to end up in that time slot

this is one reason I think that eventually there will be two football super conferences with "divisions" to create less travel.

will be interesting to see if in the future either schedule non-conference games in the eastern time zone

other sports except for basketball are just hosed for travel if they do compete in a full Big 10 schedule

Yes, I can see the travel situation working better for football than for anyone else, and potentially being an absolute disaster for many other teams.  I'm not sure why you except basketball from the "hosing," though.  It would seem to me that basketball is one of the worst sports for constant long-range travel.

[81alum]

Looking forward let's say 4 to 6 years I would like to see what the impacts on the student athletes at SC and UCLA are both academically and physically. Ok a slide in academics won't be an issue at SC, but not so at UCLA.  The real issue is the physical issue on how the players perform and how much time they miss playing.  And what happens if the players start saying no to all the travel, and follow up with a lawsuit?  Some interesting chemistry involved with expanded travel demands, NIL, transfer portal, academics, and post playing days employment opportunities.

in football assuming the Big 10 stays at nine conference games, that means USC and UCLA will have at least four road games a year at least as far away as Nebraska (and every other year USC will have five if they continue to play ND).  I wonder if some of these games will get scheduled back-to-back and if the team will stay "on the road" for the week between games like some west coast NFL teams do for back-to-back east coast games (and of course they can do classwork virtually on the road)

and USC and UCLA home games are the new 7pm PT (or later) Big 10 inventory so I'd expect non-marque games to end up in that time slot

this is one reason I think that eventually there will be two football super conferences with "divisions" to create less travel.

will be interesting to see if in the future either schedule non-conference games in the eastern time zone

other sports except for basketball are just hosed for travel if they do compete in a full Big 10 schedule

Yes, I can see the travel situation working better for football than for anyone else, and potentially being an absolute disaster for many other teams.  I'm not sure why you except basketball from the "hosing," though.  It would seem to me that basketball is one of the worst sports for constant long-range travel.

[Softball Fan]

Looking forward let's say 4 to 6 years I would like to see what the impacts on the student athletes at SC and UCLA are both academically and physically. Ok a slide in academics won't be an issue at SC, but not so at UCLA.  The real issue is the physical issue on how the players perform and how much time they miss playing.  And what happens if the players start saying no to all the travel, and follow up with a lawsuit?  Some interesting chemistry involved with expanded travel demands, NIL, transfer portal, academics, and post playing days employment opportunities.

I agree travel would be more than the athletes have been use to.   But then look at Hawaii who has been doing it in all sports for years and years.  They don't even have the option to schedule near by non-conference games.   I haven't heard complaints from their athletes about travel.   They've gotten use to it and accept the travel business as usual.

[Softball Fan]

Looking forward let's say 4 to 6 years I would like to see what the impacts on the student athletes at SC and UCLA are both academically and physically. Ok a slide in academics won't be an issue at SC, but not so at UCLA.  The real issue is the physical issue on how the players perform and how much time they miss playing.  And what happens if the players start saying no to all the travel, and follow up with a lawsuit?  Some interesting chemistry involved with expanded travel demands, NIL, transfer portal, academics, and post playing days employment opportunities.

I agree travel would be more than the athletes have been use to.   But then look at Hawaii who has been doing it in all sports for years and years.  They don't even have the option to schedule near by non-conference games.   I haven't heard complaints from their athletes about travel.   They've gotten use to it and accept the travel business as usual.

[82lsju]

Yes, I can see the travel situation working better for football than for anyone else, and potentially being an absolute disaster for many other teams.  I'm not sure why you except basketball from the "hosing," though.  It would seem to me that basketball is one of the worst sports for constant long-range travel.

If they have 18 conference games, and USC and UCLA play each other twice, then that's 8 long distance road games, I could see scheduling two road trips a season with away games on consecutive weekends (e.g., Fri/Sun then Thur/Sat) and not returning home between those weekends

[82lsju]

Yes, I can see the travel situation working better for football than for anyone else, and potentially being an absolute disaster for many other teams.  I'm not sure why you except basketball from the "hosing," though.  It would seem to me that basketball is one of the worst sports for constant long-range travel.

If they have 18 conference games, and USC and UCLA play each other twice, then that's 8 long distance road games, I could see scheduling two road trips a season with away games on consecutive weekends (e.g., Fri/Sun then Thur/Sat) and not returning home between those weekends

[OutsiderFan]

Who represents Stanford at the Pac "CEO meeting" tonight? Only Muir? Someone else?

https://www.on3.com/news/report-pac-12-c...join-call/

What does "trade up" mean? To me that means replace Colorado with a better option. What is a better option, and based on what would they be?

[OutsiderFan]

Who represents Stanford at the Pac "CEO meeting" tonight? Only Muir? Someone else?

https://www.on3.com/news/report-pac-12-c...join-call/

What does "trade up" mean? To me that means replace Colorado with a better option. What is a better option, and based on what would they be?

[Softball Fan]

Yes, I can see the travel situation working better for football than for anyone else, and potentially being an absolute disaster for many other teams.  I'm not sure why you except basketball from the "hosing," though.  It would seem to me that basketball is one of the worst sports for constant long-range travel.

If they have 18 conference games, and USC and UCLA play each other twice, then that's 8 long distance road games, I could see scheduling two road trips a season with away games on consecutive weekends (e.g., Fri/Sun then Thur/Sat) and not returning home between those weekends

Because of quarter system, Stanford football can play three road games before classes start. USC is on the semester system so their classes start the third/fourth week of August.
Edit Update: I checked USC calendar and then saw 82lsju's following post.

On "Pardon the Interruption" Tony Kornheiser said:

Stanford and Berkeley have started looking for a place to go.

In 2024 the Big-12 will have no marquee teams.

Colorado adds nothing to the Big-12.

Blames Larry Scott for the demise of the PAC-12.

[Softball Fan]

Yes, I can see the travel situation working better for football than for anyone else, and potentially being an absolute disaster for many other teams.  I'm not sure why you except basketball from the "hosing," though.  It would seem to me that basketball is one of the worst sports for constant long-range travel.

If they have 18 conference games, and USC and UCLA play each other twice, then that's 8 long distance road games, I could see scheduling two road trips a season with away games on consecutive weekends (e.g., Fri/Sun then Thur/Sat) and not returning home between those weekends

Because of quarter system, Stanford football can play three road games before classes start. USC is on the semester system so their classes start the third/fourth week of August.
Edit Update: I checked USC calendar and then saw 82lsju's following post.

On "Pardon the Interruption" Tony Kornheiser said:

Stanford and Berkeley have started looking for a place to go.

In 2024 the Big-12 will have no marquee teams.

Colorado adds nothing to the Big-12.

Blames Larry Scott for the demise of the PAC-12.

[82lsju]

Because of quarter system, Stanford football can play three road games before classes start. Is USC on the quarter system?

they are on semesters, classes this year start on Aug 21

https://academics.usc.edu/calendar/acade...2023-2024/

UCLA is on quarters, classes this year start on Sept 28

https://registrar.ucla.edu/file/d4509748...2fd40e5190

---

Who represents Stanford at the Pac "CEO meeting" tonight? Only Muir? Someone else?

https://www.on3.com/news/report-pac-12-c...join-call/

What does "trade up" mean? To me that means replace Colorado with a better option. What is a better option, and based on what would they be?

MTL is the President until Aug 31 so he'll probably be part of the call.

[82lsju]

Because of quarter system, Stanford football can play three road games before classes start. Is USC on the quarter system?

they are on semesters, classes this year start on Aug 21

https://academics.usc.edu/calendar/acade...2023-2024/

UCLA is on quarters, classes this year start on Sept 28

https://registrar.ucla.edu/file/d4509748...2fd40e5190

---

Who represents Stanford at the Pac "CEO meeting" tonight? Only Muir? Someone else?

https://www.on3.com/news/report-pac-12-c...join-call/

What does "trade up" mean? To me that means replace Colorado with a better option. What is a better option, and based on what would they be?

MTL is the President until Aug 31 so he'll probably be part of the call.

[Softball Fan]

Colorado Board of Regents voted to move to Big 12 so it's official.  I read Colorado doesn't have to pay an exit fee because they are moving at the end of the current media deal.  I don't know much about these deals and don't know what the new deal will specify.  But maybe there will be a continuing exodus after the 2023/2024 season if there is no exit fee to leave.

[Softball Fan]

Colorado Board of Regents voted to move to Big 12 so it's official.  I read Colorado doesn't have to pay an exit fee because they are moving at the end of the current media deal.  I don't know much about these deals and don't know what the new deal will specify.  But maybe there will be a continuing exodus after the 2023/2024 season if there is no exit fee to leave.

[chrisk]

Truthfully, who in the Pac-12 is really going to miss Colorado? There were never really a great fit.
The 3 other corner schools may not being going anywhere themselves. The Big 12 is limiting themselves to 14 schools and they are reportedly eyeing UCONN for their next target. You can't assume that Arizona could ace out UCONN and would Arizona be able to leave ASU behind.

---

The delay in the Pac-12 media deal seems to be pointing toward a streaming first option. It may be painful at first
but it may give the Pac-12 a headstart on getting the best streaming real estate.

[chrisk]

Truthfully, who in the Pac-12 is really going to miss Colorado? There were never really a great fit.
The 3 other corner schools may not being going anywhere themselves. The Big 12 is limiting themselves to 14 schools and they are reportedly eyeing UCONN for their next target. You can't assume that Arizona could ace out UCONN and would Arizona be able to leave ASU behind.

---

The delay in the Pac-12 media deal seems to be pointing toward a streaming first option. It may be painful at first
but it may give the Pac-12 a headstart on getting the best streaming real estate.

[Goose]

Truthfully, who in the Pac-12 is really going to miss Colorado?  There were never really a great fit.

Very true IMO.

The 3 other corner schools may not being going anywhere themselves.  The Big 12 is limiting themselves to 14 schools and they are reportedly eyeing UCONN for their next target.  You can't assume that Arizona could ace out UCONN and would Arizona be able to leave ASU behind.

I think it probable Arizona has laid pretty good groundwork with the Big-12. However, the Big-12 does need some more East Coast balance to match Central Florida and West Virginia. Not sure UCONN does that though. Pretty far from Central Florida. OTOH, Arizona is West of everybody else. ASU can probably force a "package" deal if they want to do so. UofA probably cannot. It would be just typical for ASU to prevent UofA from leaving even though ASU really doesn't want to go to the Big-12 anyway.

---

The delay in the Pac-12 media deal seems to be pointing toward a streaming first option.  It may be painful at first
but it may give the Pac-12 a headstart on getting the best streaming real estate.

If anybody cares, which IMO is dubious.

[Goose]

Truthfully, who in the Pac-12 is really going to miss Colorado?  There were never really a great fit.

Very true IMO.

The 3 other corner schools may not being going anywhere themselves.  The Big 12 is limiting themselves to 14 schools and they are reportedly eyeing UCONN for their next target.  You can't assume that Arizona could ace out UCONN and would Arizona be able to leave ASU behind.

I think it probable Arizona has laid pretty good groundwork with the Big-12. However, the Big-12 does need some more East Coast balance to match Central Florida and West Virginia. Not sure UCONN does that though. Pretty far from Central Florida. OTOH, Arizona is West of everybody else. ASU can probably force a "package" deal if they want to do so. UofA probably cannot. It would be just typical for ASU to prevent UofA from leaving even though ASU really doesn't want to go to the Big-12 anyway.

---

The delay in the Pac-12 media deal seems to be pointing toward a streaming first option.  It may be painful at first
but it may give the Pac-12 a headstart on getting the best streaming real estate.

If anybody cares, which IMO is dubious.

[lex24]

Replace them with SDSU.

From Stewart Mandel in TA:

The Pac-12’s inability to nail down its deal sooner has all but assured the Aztecs won’t be able to join before 2025, lest they have to pay the Mountain West double their exit fee. Plus, as of media day on Friday, there were at least two schools still opposed to expansion, per two league sources. One would think they’ll reconsider that stance now, though this being the Pac-12, never gamble on it acting rationally.

I don't see the end of the world with a 9-team conference for one year and SDSU joining a year later. But, you have to ask yourself if SDSU adds even as much value as Colorado.

Yes, it does. Nice football stadium.  Excellent basketball program.  Nice place to travel to.

[lex24]

Replace them with SDSU.

From Stewart Mandel in TA:

The Pac-12’s inability to nail down its deal sooner has all but assured the Aztecs won’t be able to join before 2025, lest they have to pay the Mountain West double their exit fee. Plus, as of media day on Friday, there were at least two schools still opposed to expansion, per two league sources. One would think they’ll reconsider that stance now, though this being the Pac-12, never gamble on it acting rationally.

I don't see the end of the world with a 9-team conference for one year and SDSU joining a year later. But, you have to ask yourself if SDSU adds even as much value as Colorado.

Yes, it does. Nice football stadium.  Excellent basketball program.  Nice place to travel to.

[jacket3ree]

San Diego State is an upgrade over Colorado. Same time zone, better teams (Colorado doesn't even play baseball beyond the club level), and is now the only available anchor left in Southern California. It is interesting that with 24 million people and many universities, there are only three D1 college football programs there. Texas' population is 30 million and there are 12 D1 programs. Culture matters.

Colorado is the symptom (of freakoutery), not the disease. They are a bit player on the national scene of late, and that fits the Big12 once the Big2 depart.

Someone mentioned a bicoastal conference. That might work to counter the B1G and SEC. The landscape would be something like this:

SEC - regional football mad conference with good basketball. Keep doing what you are doing and you can just hold Champeen of the Southland playoffs all by yourself.  The ACC GOR is going to go through some sort of mutually assured destruction soon - they aren't just going to stand by until 2036.  Who thought that was a good idea? Clemson, FSU, and Da U peel off and find their more natural home.  With the western additions, this would be a 13 + 2 + 3 = 18-team league, which does seem preferable to a 13- or 15-team league.

B1G - national conference with academic prestige. Everyone wants in this conference.

Below those two, a scramble to remain relevant and capable of doing damage in the playoffs. Right now, 3 additional P5, but massive reorganization seems inevitable.

The Big12 is just gobbling whatever leftovers they can. (Colorado is a leftover.)  UCONN?  Great hoops, I guess. This is sort of a glorified Conference USA running from New England, through the Alleghenies, down into Florida and Texas, then out and up to Provo.  So, national but not the B1G.

The ACC and Pac seem ready to implode, so why not consolidate and become the non-flyover conference. NFC! It could be massive, or it could be selective. 

Washington x 2
Oregon x 2
Cal
Stanford

Six Pac

This leaves out SDSU, Fresno, Hawaii - which is just too far from Boston - and there is still a Mtn West

Boston College
Steal Maryland back to show what's what
Virginia
Duke
UNC
Tech

Six Atlantic

Old school ACC plus BC to anchor the northeast.  'Cuse, Pitt, Va Tech, Louisville, etc were always Big East.  If this goes to a mega conference with San Diego State, et al then add in Wake, NC State, and the like to balance it out.

What might happen is the SEC and B1G are professional football and basketball developmental leagues and everyone else and other sports in the SEC and B1G footprints go back to natural geographic conferences. Which the SEC and B1G would dominate because they have so much more money than everyone else. Or, would that money just be folded back into football and basketball?

[jacket3ree]

San Diego State is an upgrade over Colorado. Same time zone, better teams (Colorado doesn't even play baseball beyond the club level), and is now the only available anchor left in Southern California. It is interesting that with 24 million people and many universities, there are only three D1 college football programs there. Texas' population is 30 million and there are 12 D1 programs. Culture matters.

Colorado is the symptom (of freakoutery), not the disease. They are a bit player on the national scene of late, and that fits the Big12 once the Big2 depart.

Someone mentioned a bicoastal conference. That might work to counter the B1G and SEC. The landscape would be something like this:

SEC - regional football mad conference with good basketball. Keep doing what you are doing and you can just hold Champeen of the Southland playoffs all by yourself.  The ACC GOR is going to go through some sort of mutually assured destruction soon - they aren't just going to stand by until 2036.  Who thought that was a good idea? Clemson, FSU, and Da U peel off and find their more natural home.  With the western additions, this would be a 13 + 2 + 3 = 18-team league, which does seem preferable to a 13- or 15-team league.

B1G - national conference with academic prestige. Everyone wants in this conference.

Below those two, a scramble to remain relevant and capable of doing damage in the playoffs. Right now, 3 additional P5, but massive reorganization seems inevitable.

The Big12 is just gobbling whatever leftovers they can. (Colorado is a leftover.)  UCONN?  Great hoops, I guess. This is sort of a glorified Conference USA running from New England, through the Alleghenies, down into Florida and Texas, then out and up to Provo.  So, national but not the B1G.

The ACC and Pac seem ready to implode, so why not consolidate and become the non-flyover conference. NFC! It could be massive, or it could be selective. 

Washington x 2
Oregon x 2
Cal
Stanford

Six Pac

This leaves out SDSU, Fresno, Hawaii - which is just too far from Boston - and there is still a Mtn West

Boston College
Steal Maryland back to show what's what
Virginia
Duke
UNC
Tech

Six Atlantic

Old school ACC plus BC to anchor the northeast.  'Cuse, Pitt, Va Tech, Louisville, etc were always Big East.  If this goes to a mega conference with San Diego State, et al then add in Wake, NC State, and the like to balance it out.

What might happen is the SEC and B1G are professional football and basketball developmental leagues and everyone else and other sports in the SEC and B1G footprints go back to natural geographic conferences. Which the SEC and B1G would dominate because they have so much more money than everyone else. Or, would that money just be folded back into football and basketball?