ADVERTISEMENT

Canzano's suggesting its UTSA and Texas State...

Canzano is a lot like the Big12 twitter trolls. If you throw out enough material, enough theories, and enough rumors, sooner or later you'll say something that's at least partially correct.
 
Canzano is a lot like the Big12 twitter trolls. If you throw out enough material, enough theories, and enough rumors, sooner or later you'll say something that's at least partially correct.

Take 50 swings at a pinata, bound to hit it once
 
  • Like
Reactions: Observer11
Not taking UNLV and UNM was an epic fail

100% agree.

The Oregon State AD (and defacto Pac-12 commissioner) already said nine football schools/eight conference games was the sweet spot. Trying to schedule five non-conference games with SEC/B1G schools having only two (or less) open slots is a fool's errand. End up with a bunch of FCS teams and home-and-homes with MWC schools.

Lowballing Memphis and Tulane was an epic fail

Those schools are aiming for the Big 12 or ACC (if it still exists a few years from now). Not sure there was a decent deal to be made for the Pac-12, particularly if the still to be announced media contract is less than $10M annually. Seems like the whole charade was more about Memphis and Tulane trying to stay relevant in the realignment discussions.

TX State and UTSA is an epic fail.

The average shotgun marriage in Vegas would have more staying power
 
Last edited:
Not taking UNLV and UNM was an epic fail

Lowballing Memphis and Tulane was an epic fail

TX State and UTSA is an epic fail. Slightly above grabbing EWU and CWU on the excitement meter.

I'm not sold on UNLV and there's a reason why UNM was left out. The Rebels have been jack squat in college athletics for most of the past 30 years. Barry Odom made some noise but he's gone. Dan Mullen is there now but the biggest thing that he proved was that he could drive Florida into the basement of the SEC. UNM is a second rate program with one of the smallest budgets in the Mountain West. They haven't appeared in a bowl game outside of their own state in over two decades and haven't had a winning season in nearly a decade. There's a reason that the defectors from the MWC didn't want them.

I'm not wild about Texas State or UTSA and I agree that it will be a fail if that's what we get, but there was no point in overpaying for bad programs from the MWC. UNLV has potential and I'd like to see them change course, but they are not a program that is going to have a big impact on our future.
 
I'm not sold on UNLV and there's a reason why UNM was left out. The Rebels have been jack squat in college athletics for most of the past 30 years. Barry Odom made some noise but he's gone. Dan Mullen is there now but the biggest thing that he proved was that he could drive Florida into the basement of the SEC. UNM is a second rate program with one of the smallest budgets in the Mountain West. They haven't appeared in a bowl game outside of their own state in over two decades and haven't had a winning season in nearly a decade. There's a reason that the defectors from the MWC didn't want them.

I'm not wild about Texas State or UTSA and I agree that it will be a fail if that's what we get, but there was no point in overpaying for bad programs from the MWC. UNLV has potential and I'd like to see them change course, but they are not a program that is going to have a big impact on our future.

There is no one left with a storied winning history. There is no one left with a great team in a great market. Ships have all sailed. The Pac has limited options at best. Time to make business decisions about who is left and what you need.

They need games. They need Western US travel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cr8zyncalif
There is no one left with a storied winning history. There is no one left with a great team in a great market. Ships have all sailed. The Pac has limited options at best. Time to make business decisions about who is left and what you need.

They need games. They need Western US travel.

I don't disagree. I just think the angst over UNM in particular is way overblown. They have three winning seasons in the past couple decades and it's a place where coaching careers go to die. Might as well bring in Hawaii and have a good place to watch a game every few years.
 
I'm not sold on UNLV and there's a reason why UNM was left out. The Rebels have been jack squat in college athletics for most of the past 30 years. Barry Odom made some noise but he's gone. Dan Mullen is there now but the biggest thing that he proved was that he could drive Florida into the basement of the SEC. UNM is a second rate program with one of the smallest budgets in the Mountain West. They haven't appeared in a bowl game outside of their own state in over two decades and haven't had a winning season in nearly a decade. There's a reason that the defectors from the MWC didn't want them.

I'm not wild about Texas State or UTSA and I agree that it will be a fail if that's what we get, but there was no point in overpaying for bad programs from the MWC. UNLV has potential and I'd like to see them change course, but they are not a program that is going to have a big impact on our future.
At this point, we’re debating about which nobody could be somebody. It’s like analyzing bubble teams in the NCAA tournament - which team might have been good enough to be cannon fodder for a high seed? None of them are going anywhere, so it barely matters.

Putting it in simpler terms…which of these turds is shiniest?
 
I don't disagree. I just think the angst over UNM in particular is way overblown. They have three winning seasons in the past couple decades and it's a place where coaching careers go to die. Might as well bring in Hawaii and have a good place to watch a game every few years.

Yes. Bring in Hawaii. If the Pac has any sense they’d be building a league based on tier 1 research. Start there, build out.

Ask SC if they care if a team that sucks joins their conference… Or Alabama or Ohio State…. Easy win. Ring it up and go home.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeteTheChop
I'm not sold on UNLV and there's a reason why UNM was left out. The Rebels have been jack squat in college athletics for most of the past 30 years. Barry Odom made some noise but he's gone. Dan Mullen is there now but the biggest thing that he proved was that he could drive Florida into the basement of the SEC. UNM is a second rate program with one of the smallest budgets in the Mountain West. They haven't appeared in a bowl game outside of their own state in over two decades and haven't had a winning season in nearly a decade. There's a reason that the defectors from the MWC didn't want them.

I'm not wild about Texas State or UTSA and I agree that it will be a fail if that's what we get, but there was no point in overpaying for bad programs from the MWC. UNLV has potential and I'd like to see them change course, but they are not a program that is going to have a big impact on our future.
Isn’t that the kind of program you want to grab though? Buy low? Florida State was a joke of a program at one point. I’m sure there’s others who had a similar rise. Who’s to Say Texas State isn’t a sleeping giant?
 
Isn’t that the kind of program you want to grab though? Buy low? Florida State was a joke of a program at one point. I’m sure there’s others who had a similar rise. Who’s to Say Texas State isn’t a sleeping giant?

Me. Texas State is not a sleeping giant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeteTheChop
Isn’t that the kind of program you want to grab though? Buy low? Florida State was a joke of a program at one point. I’m sure there’s others who had a similar rise. Who’s to Say Texas State isn’t a sleeping giant?

FSU was never worse than the No. 3 brand in Florida.

What's the likelihood of Texas State passing Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU in the state's college football hierarchy? Probably about the same as Eastern leapfrogging WSU 🤷‍♂️
 
Not taking UNLV and UNM was an epic fail

Lowballing Memphis and Tulane was an epic fail

TX State and UTSA is an epic fail. Slightly above grabbing EWU and CWU on the excitement meter.
I remained unconvinced we ever actually had a real shot at the nevada schools. Same with Memphis/Tulane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cr8zyncalif
I don't disagree. I just think the angst over UNM in particular is way overblown. They have three winning seasons in the past couple decades and it's a place where coaching careers go to die. Might as well bring in Hawaii and have a good place to watch a game every few years.

If the Lobos are terrible in football just about every season but average a league-high 13k in hoops attendance ... might that provide more value than a directional school from Texas with football "potential"?

Wins and losses are a zero-sum game. If it's UNM finishing last or close to it each year, what difference does it make?

WSU and Boise along with maybe OSU and Fresno will be the schools carrying the water in football. Nobody - least of all media companies - cares about the bottom feeders
 
Last edited:
I don't disagree. I just think the angst over UNM in particular is way overblown. They have three winning seasons in the past couple decades and it's a place where coaching careers go to die. Might as well bring in Hawaii and have a good place to watch a game every few years.

Hawaii >>> any of the Texas candidates other than Rice.

Even if Rice sucks in football (which they usually do), it's an elite academic institution with an (aging) power conference legacy and more than enough money to join for free if Theresa and the OSU athletic director were to offer an invite.

Add UNLV and Rice or UNLV and New Mexico and lock the Pac-12 door until the ACC falls apart
 
Ask SC if they care if a team that sucks joins their conference… Or Alabama or Ohio State…. Easy win. Ring it up and go home.

You know who else likes schools that don't win much?

AD's from traditionally mediocre (and worse) programs who also see a good chance for a victory as their programs scrambl to have winning records
 
You know who else likes schools that don't win much?

AD's from traditionally mediocre (and worse) programs who also see a good chance for a victory as their programs scrambl to have winning records

Winning matters. Unless you’re WSU. Then just selling out matters. And ppl wonder why there arent more fans and more donors. In the last 100 yrs of WSU football, how many students have graduated in 4 yrs having seen WSU have a winning season all 4 yrs they were on campus?
 
You know who else likes schools that don't win much?

AD's from traditionally mediocre (and worse) programs who also see a good chance for a victory as their programs scrambl to have winning records
If being a doormat for easy wins was high on the desirables list for conference membership, WSU and OSU would have gotten an invite to the B12/B10/SEC.
 
At this point, we’re debating about which nobody could be somebody. It’s like analyzing bubble teams in the NCAA tournament - which team might have been good enough to be cannon fodder for a high seed? None of them are going anywhere, so it barely matters.

Putting it in simpler terms…which of these turds is shiniest?
I think back on an article from months back talking about things that lead to a good media deal for colleges, and the key thing that was identified was being in the same market as a pro team. With that in mind, Memphis, Tulane, and UTSA would make sense. Any others under consideration?
 
If being a doormat for easy wins was high on the desirables list for conference membership, WSU and OSU would have gotten an invite to the B12/B10/SEC.

The bar is higher for entry to those three conferences.

Boise and WSU are the football heavyweights in the New Pac.

That's not gonna change no matter who Theresa invites .. and, apparently, nor will the value of the TV deal as apparently there's an agreement with four media partners even though at least more one school must be added
 
Isn’t that the kind of program you want to grab though? Buy low? Florida State was a joke of a program at one point. I’m sure there’s others who had a similar rise. Who’s to Say Texas State isn’t a sleeping giant?
They will remain constrained by Texas legislative support.

FYI:


### Approximate Ranking of Public Universities by State Funding
Below is an estimated ranking of Texas public universities based on state appropriations, with larger systems and flagship institutions generally receiving more due to higher enrollment and PUF/TUF eligibility. Note that exact amounts fluctuate, and some figures are biennial (covering two years).

1. The University of Texas at Austin
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $858 million biennially ($429 million/year) + $450 million from PUF via the Available University Fund (AUF).
- Reason: UT Austin is the flagship of the UT System, with high enrollment (~52,000 students) and significant PUF distributions. State general revenue (~10% of its $3.97 billion budget) and AUF make it the top-funded institution.

2. Texas A&M University (College Station)
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $800–900 million biennially ($400–450 million/year) + ~$225 million from PUF/AUF.
- Reason: As the flagship of the Texas A&M System, it has large enrollment (~74,000 students) and receives one-third of PUF distributions. Formula funding and research allocations are substantial.

3. University of Houston
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $300–400 million biennially ($150–200 million/year) + ~$22 million from TUF.
- Reason: A major research university (~46,000 students) and TUF beneficiary, it receives significant formula funding and non-formula items for research.

4. Texas Tech University
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $300–350 million biennially ($150–175 million/year) + ~$22 million from TUF.
- Reason: Large enrollment (~40,000 students) and TUF eligibility drive funding, with additional allocations for research and health-related programs.

5. University of North Texas
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $250–300 million biennially ($125–150 million/year) + ~$22 million from TUF.
- Reason: Growing enrollment (~44,000 students) and TUF support bolster its funding, though it’s slightly less than UH or Texas Tech due to fewer specialized programs.

6. Texas State University
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $250–300 million biennially ($125–150 million/year) + $22.3 million from TUF.
- Reason: Enrollment of ~38,000 students and TUF eligibility ensure steady funding, with investments aimed at achieving R1 research status.

7. The University of Texas at San Antonio
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $200–250 million biennially ($100–125 million/year).
- Reason: Growing enrollment (~34,000 students) and urban location drive formula funding, with potential future TUF eligibility.

8. The University of Texas at Arlington
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $200–250 million biennially ($100–125 million/year).
- Reason: Large enrollment (~43,000 students) supports formula funding, though it lacks PUF or TUF benefits.

9. The University of Texas at Dallas
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $150–200 million biennially ($75–100 million/year).
- Reason: Enrollment of ~31,000 students and research focus contribute, with UT System support but no direct PUF access.

10. Texas Woman’s University
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $100–150 million biennially ($50–75 million/year).
- Reason: Smaller enrollment (~15,000 students) and specialized focus (health, education) result in moderate formula funding.

11. Sam Houston State University
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $100–150 million biennially ($50–75 million/year).
- Reason: Enrollment of ~21,000 students supports funding, with emphasis on teacher education and criminal justice.

12. Stephen F. Austin State University
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $80–120 million biennially ($40–60 million/year).
- Reason: Smaller enrollment (~11,000 students) and recent integration into the UT System limit funding.

13. Lamar University
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $80–120 million biennially ($40–60 million/year).
- Reason: Enrollment of ~17,000 students and regional focus yield modest formula funding.

14. Other Public Universities (e.g., Angelo State, Midwestern State, Texas A&M University-Commerce, etc.)
- Estimated Annual State Funding: $20–80 million biennially ($10–40 million/year each).
- Reason: Smaller enrollments (5,000–15,000 students) and regional roles result in lower formula-based allocations.

### Notes
- PUF Disparity: UT Austin and Texas A&M benefit significantly from PUF, creating a funding gap with other institutions. TUF aims to address this for UH, Texas Tech, UNT, and Texas State.
- Conditions on Funding: Recent budgets tie funding to compliance with laws like Senate Bill 17 (banning DEI offices) and tuition freezes.
- Data Gaps: Exact per-university allocations require detailed Legislative Budget Board reports, which are not fully public or current. Estimates are based on biennial budgets, enrollment, and endowment distributions.
- Health-Related Institutions: Universities with medical schools (e.g., UT Health Science Centers) receive separate appropriations, not included here.

### Sources
- Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board ()
- Legislative Budget Board (,)
- State Higher Education Executive Officers Association ()
- UT Austin Budget Office (,)
- Texas University Fund Details (,)
- Permanent University Fund (,)
- X Post on Funding Disparities ()

For precise figures, consult the Texas Legislative Budget Board’s 2024–2025 biennial budget or the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board’s funding reports. If you need a deeper analysis of a specific university, let me know!
 
Winning matters. Unless you’re WSU. Then just selling out matters. And ppl wonder why there arent more fans and more donors. In the last 100 yrs of WSU football, how many students have graduated in 4 yrs having seen WSU have a winning season all 4 yrs they were on campus?
Without looking at the history, I'm going to guess that the freshman classes of 2014 and 2015 are just about the only ones who can say that.
 
I think back on an article from months back talking about things that lead to a good media deal for colleges, and the key thing that was identified was being in the same market as a pro team. With that in mind, Memphis, Tulane, and UTSA would make sense. Any others under consideration?
That author was drawing incorrect parallels. Good media deals go with good, large markets. Pro teams go mostly with good, large markets. It's the market that's the draw - not the connection to a pro team.
 
If being a doormat for easy wins was high on the desirables list for conference membership, WSU and OSU would have gotten an invite to the B12/B10/SEC.
You have to be a doormat who brings something else. Money, prestige, or market. WSU and OSU have none of these.
 
Without looking at the history, I'm going to guess that the freshman classes of 2014 and 2015 are just about the only ones who can say that.

WSU needs to win. If that means the New Mexico schools and Nevada schools get into the conference, as long as they have the required research tier, fine.
 
ehhhhhhh

not sure how you're defining market, but pre- relegation WSU tv viewership was higher than most of the current p4 doormats.
The only thing that matters is the market you're located in, because that's what the networks understand how to quantify.

I posted about this a few days ago - as far as they're concerned, our previous viewership numbers were inflated because of who we played - not because of who we are. And unfortunately, our shitty viewership last season just provides them with confirmation bias.
 
I’m not too worried about it. Why? Because I don’t see college being a thing in the not too distant future. I’m not talking about college football, I mean on-campus colleges and universities in general.

Where do you see WSU Pullman’s enrollment in 10 years? What’s going to spike it?
 
I’m not too worried about it. Why? Because I don’t see college being a thing in the not too distant future. I’m not talking about college football, I mean on-campus colleges and universities in general.

Where do you see WSU Pullman’s enrollment in 10 years? What’s going to spike it?

Closure of other schools.
Dropping current gpa requirements.
That’s what will spike it.

That is the path forward for a lot of schools. Will they do it? Dunno.
 
I’m not too worried about it. Why? Because I don’t see college being a thing in the not too distant future. I’m not talking about college football, I mean on-campus colleges and universities in general.

Where do you see WSU Pullman’s enrollment in 10 years? What’s going to spike it?
You are probably closer to the truth than not.

In 10 years my guess is attendance drop of about 30%. Maybe more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UberCougars
I don't see much of a need for higher education beyond 10, certainly 20 years. Reading, writing, and arithmetic are already handled by A.I.

Colleges will evolve I suppose, but I don't see a future where people pay $100K to send their kids to Pullman. I suggested a long time ago that WSU should consider getting ahead of the coming trade school resurgence and figure out a way to offer some of the big trade programs and incorporating them with existing business curriculum. Business major with a specialty emphasis in HVAC, plumbing, carpentry, electrical, coding, A.I., etc.
 
I don't see much of a need for higher education beyond 10, certainly 20 years. Reading, writing, and arithmetic are already handled by A.I.

Colleges will evolve I suppose, but I don't see a future where people pay $100K to send their kids to Pullman. I suggested a long time ago that WSU should consider getting ahead of the coming trade school resurgence and figure out a way to offer some of the big trade programs and incorporating them with existing business curriculum. Business major with a specialty emphasis in HVAC, plumbing, carpentry, electrical, coding, A.I., etc.

Have you seen how much Perry in Yakima is?
 
Have you seen how much Perry in Yakima is?
Well I live here and I don't know. Are you saying it's cost-effective or what? From the outside it's an impressive little place.

That said, a hard no to bastardizing our UNIVERSITY and turning it into part community college or trade school. You see the Washington CC's offering a few bachelor's degrees and now they are "Colleges". YVCC is now YVC, etc. We don't want to go in the other direction. At any price point.
 
Closure of other schools.
Dropping current gpa requirements.
That’s what will spike it.

That is the path forward for a lot of schools. Will they do it? Dunno.
Dropping GPA requirements? Good grief we are doomed. Kids already have inflated GPAs with unlimited test retakes!
 
Well I live here and I don't know. Are you saying it's cost-effective or what? From the outside it's an impressive little place.

That said, a hard no to bastardizing our UNIVERSITY and turning it into part community college or trade school. You see the Washington CC's offering a few bachelor's degrees and now they are "Colleges". YVCC is now YVC, etc. We don't want to go in the other direction. At any price point.

It is not as cheap as some may think.
 
Dropping GPA requirements? Good grief we are doomed. Kids already have inflated GPAs with unlimited test retakes!

Do you wanna be open for business or not? Pick. Cause for a lot of schools that is the decision happening right now. Open the doors and let in paying customers or close the doors and find somewhere else to work.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT