bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,271 
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 27, 2023 7:48:45 GMT -5
I am pretty sure that the B12 and Oregon have been at least talking for months. The B12 would be absolutely crazy not to want Oregon (IMO) - and I do think there is a scenario where Oregon joins the B12. Oregon is probably looking at this in terms of their football program and the expanded college playoffs after this year. An 8 or 9 team PAC conference would actually be good for Oregon football - but if the PAC looks to implode and there is nothing from the B1G - the B12 may end up being their best option. I don't know about Washington - I believe they would have more resistance to joining the B12 and I don't know that they have even been talking to the B12. That said - I think the B12 would have interest and likely that Washington wouldn't have interest. Stanford/Cal - I wouldn't say 'no' interest, but I don't see any likely real interest in either of these schools - not to mention those schools will never have interest in the B12. Oregon State/Washington State - no chance. I don't get the B12 interest in Colorado by itself. This puts the conference with an odd # of teams - why would the B12 do this (potentially stop here for even one season)? This isn't like adding Penn State - or adding Notre Dame - where having an odd number of teams is worth it. Colorado doesn't do this for the B12? I highly doubt the Big 12's plan is to solely bring in Colorado. One school has to be the first domino to fall. Colorado was the Big 12 school who got happy feet many years ago for fear of being left out (or replaced by Baylor) of the block of Big 12 schools set to join the PAC. Their reputation for abandoning ship first in the past is probably why they were targeted first this time around. Deja vu. Colorado did jump ship when it was looking like TX/OK/OKSt/TTU were going to join the PAC. Sort of a preemptive move. As it turned out - none of those other B12 schools moved and the PAC ended up bringing in Utah to join Colorado. If this scenario plays out in reverse - Colorado would be the only school leaving the PAC - and the B12 would be left with finding someone else outside the P5 to join. And that has the same issues that the PAC will have in trying to replace Colorado. I do think another PAC school will come, but at this point - that is far from certain based on all the reporting. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Jul 27, 2023 7:51:05 GMT -5
Wow…unanimous. Not even one “no” vote. Must be a big slap in the face to the PAC 12 when nobody in the Big 12 object to CU(a lousy CU also) coming in. You don’t normally see unanimous votes of “Yes” on a cellar dweller team. BIG 10 didn’t want to be seen as responsible for the death of the PAC 12. Well….the Big 12 will have that honor. Which is kind of ironic in that the PAC almost killed the Big 12 like 15-20 years ago when they were all set to add half its member schools (Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Colorado). |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Jul 27, 2023 7:53:55 GMT -5
I highly doubt the Big 12's plan is to solely bring in Colorado. One school has to be the first domino to fall. Colorado was the Big 12 school who got happy feet many years ago for fear of being left out (or replaced by Baylor) of the block of Big 12 schools set to join the PAC. Their reputation for abandoning ship first in the past is probably why they were targeted first this time around. Deja vu. Colorado did jump ship when it was looking like TX/OK/OKSt/TTU were going to join the PAC. Sort of a preemptive move. As it turned out - none of those other B12 schools moved and the PAC ended up bringing in Utah to join Colorado. If this scenario plays out in reverse - Colorado would be the only school leaving the PAC - and the B12 would be left with finding someone else outside the P5 to join. And that has the same issues that the PAC will have in trying to replace Colorado. I do think another PAC school will come, but at this point - that is far from certain based on all the reporting. Worst case scenario, the Big 12 adds Utah (who would kind of be left on an island should CU depart). There had been recent rumors that the Big 12 was also eyeing UConn. Don't think finding a 14th member will be an issue. |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,271
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 27, 2023 8:08:58 GMT -5
Deja vu. Colorado did jump ship when it was looking like TX/OK/OKSt/TTU were going to join the PAC. Sort of a preemptive move. As it turned out - none of those other B12 schools moved and the PAC ended up bringing in Utah to join Colorado. If this scenario plays out in reverse - Colorado would be the only school leaving the PAC - and the B12 would be left with finding someone else outside the P5 to join. And that has the same issues that the PAC will have in trying to replace Colorado. I do think another PAC school will come, but at this point - that is far from certain based on all the reporting. Worst case scenario, the Big 12 adds Utah (who would kind of be left on an island should CU depart). There had been recent rumors that the Big 12 was also eyeing UConn. Don't think finding a 14th member will be an issue. I get the feeling that Utah really isn't of much interest for the B12 right now. If the B12 were to only add Colorado and Utah - I would be very disappointed. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Jul 27, 2023 8:14:06 GMT -5
Worst case scenario, the Big 12 adds Utah (who would kind of be left on an island should CU depart). There had been recent rumors that the Big 12 was also eyeing UConn. Don't think finding a 14th member will be an issue. . If the B12 were to only add Colorado and Utah - I would be very disappointed. That would be another deja vu. Utah not necessarily being a conference's first or second choice, but benefitting from other schools taking a pass and the Big 12 conference wanting an even number of members.  |
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jul 27, 2023 8:17:03 GMT -5
Deja vu. Colorado did jump ship when it was looking like TX/OK/OKSt/TTU were going to join the PAC. Sort of a preemptive move. As it turned out - none of those other B12 schools moved and the PAC ended up bringing in Utah to join Colorado. If this scenario plays out in reverse - Colorado would be the only school leaving the PAC - and the B12 would be left with finding someone else outside the P5 to join. And that has the same issues that the PAC will have in trying to replace Colorado. I do think another PAC school will come, but at this point - that is far from certain based on all the reporting. Worst case scenario, the Big 12 adds Utah (who would kind of be left on an island should CU depart). There had been recent rumors that the Big 12 was also eyeing UConn. Don't think finding a 14th member will be an issue. While not ideal, I also don’t think having an odd number of teams is THAT big of a deal. FWIW, with BYU already in the league, I’d be surprised if they added Utah. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Jul 27, 2023 8:20:41 GMT -5
Worst case scenario, the Big 12 adds Utah (who would kind of be left on an island should CU depart). There had been recent rumors that the Big 12 was also eyeing UConn. Don't think finding a 14th member will be an issue. While not ideal, I also don’t think having an odd number of teams is THAT big of a deal. FWIW, with BYU already in the league, I’d be surprised if they added Utah. Oh, I definitely agree that Utah isn't most likely high on the Big 12's wish list. Expanding their footprint would be accomplished most by entering new states -- Colorado, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, and California. |
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Jul 27, 2023 8:27:11 GMT -5
The smartest thing the new Big 12 commish did was get the TV networks to agree contractually that if the conference were to add any new members from an existing P5 conference, each new member would receive the same $31.7 annual payment as the existing members. That means they can add as many PAC members as are willing to join. Well done.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 13,271
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 27, 2023 9:02:24 GMT -5
Worst case scenario, the Big 12 adds Utah (who would kind of be left on an island should CU depart). There had been recent rumors that the Big 12 was also eyeing UConn. Don't think finding a 14th member will be an issue. While not ideal, I also don’t think having an odd number of teams is THAT big of a deal. FWIW, with BYU already in the league, I’d be surprised if they added Utah. Utah sounds most steadfast in keeping the PAC together and has outwardly been resistant to the B12. This could mean many things. It could mean that the B12 really has shown no interest in Utah and so Utah really doesn't believe they have any safe haven if the PAC falls. It could mean that Utah really doesn't want to be in the B12 and maybe equally - really doesn't want to be in a conference with BYU. Or it could just be public postering and we really don't know what the B12 and Utah think of each other. I get the vibe that Utah is unlikely to be heading to the B12. |
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Jul 27, 2023 9:11:48 GMT -5
The College Football Enquirer podcast with Dan Wetzel, Pat Forde and Ross Dellanger discussed this overnight and it sounds like Colorado was the low hanging fruit that allowed the B12 to destabilize the rest of the Pac 12. Colorado had history with the Big 12 until 2010, Deion was lobbying to get back to Texas, etc. The next move is to see what the B12 can squeeze from the rattled Pac 12. If nothing shakes loose they call on UConn, which the presidents are iffy about, but Yormark could lean on them to let him get UConn.
The Pac 12 problem now becomes with a 9 game football schedule and only 9 teams (8 opponents) everybody in the league needs to pay up to each get a 12th game. Is it better to pay SDSU's $30 million exit fee after leaving them in an awkward position with the Mountain West? They could probably get SMU who wouldn't have trouble getting their exit fee together. If more teams leave, where do they turn? Boise, Fresno and Colorado State were all mentioned. (end what they said)
If I'm the Big 12 I think you call Washington and Oregon. I think Arizona is most likely to go but you want Washington and Oregon if you can get them.
I want to say that the NCAA passed legislation saying you can have a 6 team league. I'd be very interested to see a Pac 6 that plays double round robin in football with 2-4 games each in other sports. I personally think it would be fun and different. I don't know if it would be profitable or attractive to recruits.
I do imagine this delays the Pac 12 signing a tv rights deal since they made a big deal about Deion raising the value of the TV rights. Oops.
|
|
|
|
Post by lionsfan on Jul 27, 2023 9:15:02 GMT -5
I'd be bummed if the B1G passes on Oregon...the track program and venue alone is enough (not that there isn't a lot more)
|
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 27, 2023 10:22:37 GMT -5
Honestly, I don't know why anyone in the Big Ten would even care if they're viewed as "killing" the Pac-12. The Big Ten is operating from a position of strength and whatever cocktail party sour grapes people would have toward (who exactly?) the Big Ten would disappear in two news cycles. The people who really killed the Pac-12 are an incompetent Larry Scott and every Pac-12 President and AD who enabled him and didn't adapt to an obviously shifting landscape. They got outmaneuvered by Kevin Warren and a bunch of land-grant administrators. I imagine getting worked by people they view as the Clampets probably irks Pac-12 admins, but as they say "winners win and losers lose." The university presidents are the ones most responsible. They're the ones who hired two incompetent commissioners in a row, after all. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 27, 2023 10:24:18 GMT -5
Honestly, I don't know why anyone in the Big Ten would even care if they're viewed as "killing" the Pac-12. The Big Ten is operating from a position of strength and whatever cocktail party sour grapes people would have toward (who exactly?) the Big Ten would disappear in two news cycles. The people who really killed the Pac-12 are an incompetent Larry Scott and every Pac-12 President and AD who enabled him and didn't adapt to an obviously shifting landscape. They got outmaneuvered by Kevin Warren and a bunch of land-grant administrators. I imagine getting worked by people they view as the Clampets probably irks Pac-12 admins, but as they say "winners win and losers lose." Agreed. I think the “don’t want to kill the Pac-12” narrative simply comes from people trying to justify why the Big Ten isn’t interested in Washington and Oregon when the reality is that they just wouldn’t increase the per school payout. Exactly. It's like asking someone out, only for them to tell you that they're "too busy." |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 27, 2023 10:27:44 GMT -5
Would the Big 12 be interested in Oregon and Washington? Geographical doesn’t make sense but if the Big 12 had any interest in being a coast to coast conference, UO and UW make sense more than SDSU. I am pretty sure that the B12 and Oregon have been at least talking for months. The B12 would be absolutely crazy not to want Oregon (IMO) - and I do think there is a scenario where Oregon joins the B12. Oregon is probably looking at this in terms of their football program and the expanded college playoffs after this year. An 8 or 9 team PAC conference would actually be good for Oregon football - but if the PAC looks to implode and there is nothing from the B1G - the B12 may end up being their best option. I don't know about Washington - I believe they would have more resistance to joining the B12 and I don't know that they have even been talking to the B12. That said - I think the B12 would have interest and likely that Washington wouldn't have interest. Stanford/Cal - I wouldn't say 'no' interest, but I don't see any likely real interest in either of these schools - not to mention those schools will never have interest in the B12. Oregon State/Washington State - no chance. I don't get the B12 interest in Colorado by itself. This puts the conference with an odd # of teams - why would the B12 do this (potentially stop here for even one season)? This isn't like adding Penn State - or adding Notre Dame - where having an odd number of teams is worth it. Colorado doesn't do this for the B12? I think the Big 12 adds at least one more school. If no one else in the Pac-12 (e.g. Arizona) jumps, then UConn is a fallback option. I've heard that despite not being in a current P5, ESPN and Fox would agree to give UConn (five men's basketball titles in the last 25 years) a full share if it comes to that. |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jul 27, 2023 10:32:54 GMT -5
I get the feeling that Utah really isn't of much interest for the B12 right now. If the B12 were to only add Colorado and Utah - I would be very disappointed. That would be another deja vu. Utah not necessarily being a conference's first or second choice, but benefitting from other schools taking a pass and the Big 12 conference wanting an even number of members. And at the time, the Pac-12 actually needed to add someone else when they struck out on all their top choices except Colorado. They needed a 12th member so that they could play a conference championship game. But those rules have since been changed, so I don't think the Big 12 actually needs to add anyone else. I do think they'll get at least one more school, though, whether it's a Pac-12 school like Arizona or UConn as a fallback. |
|
