Let's play the doomsday Pac-12 scenario out...

[ttowncoug]

Let's say Oregon, UW, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah maybe Stanford goes independent....bolt.

That leaves WSU, OSU, and Cal.

There is a Pac-12 conference there. You add 9 teams, like: Boise, Fresno, UNLV, Nevada, SDSU, Utah St. , San Jose St, Colorado St, Hawaii to fill the conference.

I honestly think the Cougs would and could be more competitive and win the conference. A conference champ, even if it's "Super Mountain West" in a 12 team playoff gets in.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Let's say Oregon, UW, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah maybe Stanford goes independent....bolt.

That leaves WSU, OSU, and Cal.

There is a Pac-12 conference there. You add 9 teams, like: Boise, Fresno, UNLV, Nevada, SDSU, Utah St. , San Jose St, Colorado St, Hawaii to fill the conference.

I honestly think the Cougs would and could be more competitive and win the conference. A conference champ, even if it's "Super Mountain West" in a 12 team playoff gets in.

It depends on the academics. If it has to be tier 1 research schools, Boise Fresno SDSU SJSU are not getting in.

 

[ttowncoug]

I'm making an assumption Pac-12 (2.0), basically Super MWC, would get rebooted w/ new admission criteria. Again, this is the doomsday scenario that this thing blows up.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Let's say Oregon, UW, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah maybe Stanford goes independent....bolt.

That leaves WSU, OSU, and Cal.

There is a Pac-12 conference there. You add 9 teams, like: Boise, Fresno, UNLV, Nevada, SDSU, Utah St. , San Jose St, Colorado St, Hawaii to fill the conference.

I honestly think the Cougs would and could be more competitive and win the conference. A conference champ, even if it's "Super Mountain West" in a 12 team playoff gets in.

That conference you imagined would not get an automatic bid to anything except the leftovers.com bowl. In fact, you could count on pretty much all the existing bowl tie-ins going away and being replaced with exactly all the lower tier bowls. *ahem*Excuse me, LOWEST tier bowls.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

It depends on the academics. If it has to be tier 1 research schools, Boise Fresno SDSU SJSU are not getting in.

If doomsday happens.....academics will not be part of the discussion. Without Pac-12 money, WSU is in no position to be dictating anything to anyone. Who knows if the Pac-12 "brand" has any value at all after doomsday happens.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

If doomsday happens.....academics will not be part of the discussion. Without Pac-12 money, WSU is in no position to be dictating anything to anyone. Who knows if the Pac-12 "brand" has any value at all after doomsday happens.

It won't have any value. Hell, the value as it stands is little to none as is evidenced by the existing tv deal and lack of suitors for a new tv deal. And yes, diminishing the value of the competition was and is part of the plan.

 

[ttowncoug]

If the playoff goes to 12, I think you'll need to be in the top 12 to get a bid. You'll see lawsuits happen if the super schools try to monopolize the playoffs.

Yes, less value of TV contracts, etc. Games would fill programming windows and days of the week that ESPN would want.

 

[CougPatrol]

If the B10 and SEC media powers have their way, the 2 leagues will have their own playoff and championship.

If that's the case, then the response will likely be that the remaining programs in the ACC, Big12, and Pacwhatever will form their own alliance and have a network that carries their playoff and championship. It'll be smaller scale, but it won't be small, and when the buzz of the B10 and SEC wears off, there will be years when the "other" league's top-5 programs are stronger.

 

[CougSinceBirth]

If university leadership ends up allowing WSU to fall into the MWC, they should all be fired.

Part of the attraction of going to WSU is being a P5/P(10/12) school. If that is gone, there's really have nothing left to market yourself. T1 university? Sure. But I'd wager if that happens admission takes a hit, as well as the AD unable to foot bills. The university and AD instantly becomes a very less attractive option.

 

[95coug]

It depends on the academics. If it has to be tier 1 research schools, Boise Fresno SDSU SJSU are not getting in.

I'm pretty sure the R1 requirement is going to get dropped...and soon. Fresno State's AD indicated that he was contacted by the Pac-12 already. SDSU is the school that I think makes the most sense for us to pick up, they provide a metro SoCal presence, they're already pressing for R1 status, and they've got teams that fit the conference. Not sure where Fresno and SJSU sit academically, but neither really brings much else. SJSU might look better if Cal/Stanford are gone...but honestly, I think it's close to a coin flip between them and Nevada. Boise really brings nothing to the table, and I don't think should be considered. UNLV would be better than Boise.

This doomsday scenario seems - eventually - more likely to me than most of the merger ideas that have popped up. But, that conference is the WAC without BYU. It gets less money in its TV deal than the Pac-12 did. It plays on Thursday and Friday night every week. Its Saturday games kick off at 7:30. Its conference champ plays in the Vegas bowl. And as soon as the season is over, its entire all-conference team portals to the Big 10 and SEC.

Every year looking at fall camp, we'd be like the guys reading the paper at the beginning of "Major League" - we'd all be asking "who are these f'ing guys?"

And the even worse step in the doomsday scenario - what impact would this demotion have on overall enrollment, completion, and research? I'm not sure how bad it would be, but it would not be positive.

 

[BiggsCoug]

I'm pretty sure the R1 requirement is going to get dropped...and soon. Fresno State's AD indicated that he was contacted by the Pac-12 already. SDSU is the school that I think makes the most sense for us to pick up, they provide a metro SoCal presence, they're already pressing for R1 status, and they've got teams that fit the conference. Not sure where Fresno and SJSU sit academically, but neither really brings much else. SJSU might look better if Cal/Stanford are gone...but honestly, I think it's close to a coin flip between them and Nevada. Boise really brings nothing to the table, and I don't think should be considered. UNLV would be better than Boise.

This doomsday scenario seems - eventually - more likely to me than most of the merger ideas that have popped up. But, that conference is the WAC without BYU. It gets less money in its TV deal than the Pac-12 did. It plays on Thursday and Friday night every week. Its Saturday games kick off at 7:30. Its conference champ plays in the Vegas bowl. And as soon as the season is over, its entire all-conference team portals to the Big 10 and SEC.

Every year looking at fall camp, we'd be like the guys reading the paper at the beginning of "Major League" - we'd all be asking "who are these f'ing guys?"

And the even worse step in the doomsday scenario - what impact would this demotion have on overall enrollment, completion, and research? I'm not sure how bad it would be, but it would not be positive.

If Cal stayed do they let the academic standard slide? Or are they so uppity they won’t? We will find out.

At some point whoever is left out in the West has to make some decisions. Either push your chips in on football or go Big Sky. There are many reasons why fans don’t show up for games in the West similar to the Midwest and South. One glaring reason is the quality of the product and excitement. The programs have to do something to create more interest and put out a better product.

 

[ttowncoug]

If we go the Pac-12 2.0 route, I think you only have men's sports in football, basketball and baseball.

 

[CougSinceBirth]

I'm pretty sure the R1 requirement is going to get dropped...and soon. Fresno State's AD indicated that he was contacted by the Pac-12 already. SDSU is the school that I think makes the most sense for us to pick up, they provide a metro SoCal presence, they're already pressing for R1 status, and they've got teams that fit the conference. Not sure where Fresno and SJSU sit academically, but neither really brings much else. SJSU might look better if Cal/Stanford are gone...but honestly, I think it's close to a coin flip between them and Nevada. Boise really brings nothing to the table, and I don't think should be considered. UNLV would be better than Boise.

This doomsday scenario seems - eventually - more likely to me than most of the merger ideas that have popped up. But, that conference is the WAC without BYU. It gets less money in its TV deal than the Pac-12 did. It plays on Thursday and Friday night every week. Its Saturday games kick off at 7:30. Its conference champ plays in the Vegas bowl. And as soon as the season is over, its entire all-conference team portals to the Big 10 and SEC.

Every year looking at fall camp, we'd be like the guys reading the paper at the beginning of "Major League" - we'd all be asking "who are these f'ing guys?"

And the even worse step in the doomsday scenario - what impact would this demotion have on overall enrollment, completion, and research? I'm not sure how bad it would be, but it would not be positive.

IMO, WSU is cooked if a demotion happens.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

If university leadership ends up allowing WSU to fall into the MWC, they should all be fired.

Part of the attraction of going to WSU is being a P5/P(10/12) school. If that is gone, there's really have nothing left to market yourself. T1 university? Sure. But I'd wager if that happens admission takes a hit, as well as the AD unable to foot bills. The university and AD instantly becomes a very less attractive option.

How is university leadership responsible for what is happening in college football? I get the disappointment, but there is nothing that could have been done to change where we are now. This was always going to be inevitable....it's just happening sooner than many expected. If you want to be angry, be mad at the fans that haven't supported the program.

I do think that there will be a short term impact on enrollment, but realistically, 75% of WSU fans don't really give a crap about football. The vast majority of WSU alumni don't ever go back to Pullman after graduation. The biggest problem that we will see is that NIL and transfer portal changes will create a revolving door for talent, but that will also apply to any teams that we are affiliated with.

 

[CougSinceBirth]

How is university leadership responsible for what is happening in college football? I get the disappointment, but there is nothing that could have been done to change where we are now. This was always going to be inevitable....it's just happening sooner than many expected. If you want to be angry, be mad at the fans that haven't supported the program.

I do think that there will be a short term impact on enrollment, but realistically, 75% of WSU fans don't really give a crap about football. The vast majority of WSU alumni don't ever go back to Pullman after graduation. The biggest problem that we will see is that NIL and transfer portal changes will create a revolving door for talent, but that will also apply to any teams that we are affiliated with.

If admin is as good as they've been advertised, then they'll figure out a way to keep WSU in the P5/re-alignment game. Of course they don't have control when flagship schools bail on a conference/etc., but if they didn't have some contingency somewhat prepared and were caught flat-footed, that's very bad. It's not like re-alignment hasn't been a secret the past 15 years.

I think this possibility will have much, much larger impact than most think. G5 football conference games wouldn't have the draw as a P5 conference games. Pullman economically likely would take a hit with less interest. Sure maybe 75% of the alumni never return, but you have to do everything to keep that other 25% fully engaged...and I see a move to a G5-type of conference as the start to the final nail in the coffin.

Doesn't mean I'm right, but I'm not feeling optimistic about the whole thing.

 

[Coug90]

If Cal stayed do they let the academic standard slide? Or are they so uppity they won’t? We will find out.

At some point whoever is left out in the West has to make some decisions. Either push your chips in on football or go Big Sky. There are many reasons why fans don’t show up for games in the West similar to the Midwest and South. One glaring reason is the quality of the product and excitement. The programs have to do something to create more interest and put out a better product.

Can someone explain to me where/why/how the tier 1 research requirements come into play when it comes to the conference? I’ve known about this for a while but not clear on where this all started. Is this unique to the pac12 or is this common with other big conferences? Thanks.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Can someone explain to me where/why/how the tier 1 research requirements come into play when it comes to the conference? I’ve known about this for a while but not clear on where this all started. Is this unique to the pac12 or is this common with other big conferences? Thanks.

once upon a time there were institutions called "universities" or "colleges" who's primary focus was higher education, not being revenue generators and puppets to mega media corporations.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Can someone explain to me where/why/how the tier 1 research requirements come into play when it comes to the conference? I’ve known about this for a while but not clear on where this all started. Is this unique to the pac12 or is this common with other big conferences? Thanks.

I have no idea when or how it started. Never heard.

I wouldnt be surprised if the B10 and ACC had similar academic requirements.

 

[CougPatrol]

The financial shortfall from going P5 to G5 will be felt for sure, but WSU will settle in like the other G5/MWC schools have and move forward. The economies of scale for the University will shrink. Coaches salaries, future facilities upgrades, etc., but we'll still be a large public University.

As far as football attendance, I think our numbers will settle in around 25-27K fans/game; not much different than what we see currently.

 

[dgibbons]

Let's say Oregon, UW, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah maybe Stanford goes independent....bolt.

That leaves WSU, OSU, and Cal.

There is a Pac-12 conference there. You add 9 teams, like: Boise, Fresno, UNLV, Nevada, SDSU, Utah St. , San Jose St, Colorado St, Hawaii to fill the conference.

I honestly think the Cougs would and could be more competitive and win the conference. A conference champ, even if it's "Super Mountain West" in a 12 team playoff gets in.

That's not a Pac-12 conference. It's more like the old WAC.

 

[dgibbons]

It depends on the academics. If it has to be tier 1 research schools, Boise Fresno SDSU SJSU are not getting in.

Why would academics be a factor at that point? Is Stanford and Cal going to say no if they are not part of the conference?

 

[ttowncoug]

They will keep the Pac-12 name (for recognition - like the Big-12 - and current bowl arrangements).

 

[TrumpCoug]

That's not a Pac-12 conference. It's more like the old WAC.

WAC AKA "The Women and Children Conference"

 

[dgibbons]

They will keep the Pac-12 name (for recognition - like the Big-12 - and current bowl arrangements).

I would guess the Rose Bowl will no longer be a "Pac-12" bowl.

 

[CougSinceBirth]

The financial shortfall from going P5 to G5 will be felt for sure, but WSU will settle in like the other G5/MWC schools have and move forward. The economies of scale for the University will shrink. Coaches salaries, future facilities upgrades, etc., but we'll still be a large public University.

As far as football attendance, I think our numbers will settle in around 25-27K fans/game; not much different than what we see currently.

Move forward how? Do you think if WSU drops down they're going to be able to put a positive spin on that? It's a bad black eye that leaves scarring, IMO.

 

[ttowncoug]

Rose Bowl is under contract for a few more years. It would likely change if the Pac-12 changes drastically.

 

[SaveFerris]

once upon a time there were institutions called "universities" or "colleges" who's primary focus was higher education, not being revenue generators and puppets to mega media corporations.

That's where I have landed on realignment. ESPN, etc. runs the show for athletics. On its face that's not an issue. The problem is the impact that ultimately has at the institutional level and higher education overall. SC/UCLA shouldn't be held hostage by the rest of the conference, but their decision not only hurt 10 other institutions but in turn 6 states. That second order effect likely is detrimental to the overall quality (and quantity) on access to higher education across the country. Let that fester long enough and we continue to fall behind other countries in terms of education.

That "75%" that doesn't care Flat brought up is still ultimately hurt by the changing landscape.

 

[dgibbons]

That's where I have landed on realignment. ESPN, etc. runs the show for athletics. On its face that's not an issue. The problem is the impact that ultimately has at the institutional level and higher education overall. SC/UCLA shouldn't be held hostage by the rest of the conference, but their decision not only hurt 10 other institutions but in turn 6 states. That second order effect likely is detrimental to the overall quality (and quantity) on access to higher education across the country. Let that fester long enough and we continue to fall behind other countries in terms of education.

That "75%" that doesn't care Flat brought up is still ultimately hurt by the changing landscape.

Are you saying access to higher education is a problem? I disagree. There are too many people going to college right now, that ought to be going to trade or vocational school, IMO.

 

[SaveFerris]

Are you saying access to higher education is a problem? I disagree. There are too many people going to college right now, that ought to be going to trade or vocational school, IMO.

More in terms of affordable public options especially in certain programs. I don't want to knock any school in the state, but without the "Pac" how does WSU sustain its current level? It's no longer just Pullman as well with branch campuses in Spokane, the Tri Cities, Everett and Vancouver. UW is the state "flagship", but WSU provides an affordable option especially for STEM programs plus now has the Med school.

How much $$$ beyond athletics dries up without the conference? Agree on the need for more trade/vocational school. However, for decades we have fallen way behind many other countries when it comes to education beyond the bachelor's degree level.

 

[CougSinceBirth]

More in terms of affordable public options especially in certain programs. I don't want to knock any school in the state, but without the "Pac" how does WSU sustain its current level? It's no longer just Pullman as well with branch campuses in Spokane, the Tri Cities, Everett and Vancouver. UW is the state "flagship", but WSU provides an affordable option especially for STEM programs plus now has the Med school.

How much $$$ beyond athletics dries up without the conference? Agree on the need for more trade/vocational school. However, for decades we have fallen way behind many other countries when it comes to education beyond the bachelor's degree level.

Yeah, these are also questions I'm alluding to in this thread. WSU just becomes another "university" in the state of Washington and PNW.

 

[12375CAT]

IMO, WSU is cooked if a demotion happens.

Then expanding the playoff would be your only hope.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

If admin is as good as they've been advertised, then they'll figure out a way to keep WSU in the P5/re-alignment game. Of course they don't have control when flagship schools bail on a conference/etc., but if they didn't have some contingency somewhat prepared and were caught flat-footed, that's very bad. It's not like re-alignment hasn't been a secret the past 15 years.

I think this possibility will have much, much larger impact than most think. G5 football conference games wouldn't have the draw as a P5 conference games. Pullman economically likely would take a hit with less interest. Sure maybe 75% of the alumni never return, but you have to do everything to keep that other 25% fully engaged...and I see a move to a G5-type of conference as the start to the final nail in the coffin.

Doesn't mean I'm right, but I'm not feeling optimistic about the whole thing.

The idea that our leadership has the power to force WSU into a Power 5 conference is pretty laughable.

WSU has been at the bottom of the ladder for our history and has always been hamstrung by geography and inequitable arrangements with our conference peers that kept us at a disadvantage. Scheduling BS, financial inequality until the PAC-12 contract, and other factors put us so far in the hole that we were always doomed to be left out eventually.

What’s kind of sad is talking to my Big-12 brethren because they all know that their time as “Power 5” programs are going to end soon too. If the six schools jump to the Big-12, all they are doing is delaying the inevitable too.

Be angry at WSU leadership all you want, but it’s not their fault that WSU is located in SE Washington on a two lane highway with no population base to use a bargaining chip.

 

[95coug]

The idea that our leadership has the power to force WSU into a Power 5 conference is pretty laughable.

WSU has been at the bottom of the ladder for our history and has always been hamstrung by geography and inequitable arrangements with our conference peers that kept us at a disadvantage. Scheduling BS, financial inequality until the PAC-12 contract, and other factors put us so far in the hole that we were always doomed to be left out eventually.

What’s kind of sad is talking to my Big-12 brethren because they all know that their time as “Power 5” programs are going to end soon too. If the six schools jump to the Big-12, all they are doing is delaying the inevitable too.

Be angry at WSU leadership all you want, but it’s not their fault that WSU is located in SE Washington on a two lane highway with no population base to use a bargaining chip.

I'll add to that and say that in a lot of ways, this was decided 50 years ago. The big, name brand programs are - for the most part - the ones that were successful in the 50s, 60s, and 70s and established their brand at that time. They built traditions and large followings and have sustained them to the present. This latest realignment remakes college football into more like what it was to our parents and grandparents - with a handful of power programs and everyone else. The divisions are just more formalized now

 

[CougSinceBirth]

The idea that our leadership has the power to force WSU into a Power 5 conference is pretty laughable.

WSU has been at the bottom of the ladder for our history and has always been hamstrung by geography and inequitable arrangements with our conference peers that kept us at a disadvantage. Scheduling BS, financial inequality until the PAC-12 contract, and other factors put us so far in the hole that we were always doomed to be left out eventually.

What’s kind of sad is talking to my Big-12 brethren because they all know that their time as “Power 5” programs are going to end soon too. If the six schools jump to the Big-12, all they are doing is delaying the inevitable too.

Be angry at WSU leadership all you want, but it’s not their fault that WSU is located in SE Washington on a two lane highway with no population base to use a bargaining chip.

They may not have the power, but what they can control is how they handle themselves within meetings and other of their counterparts. For all his faults, pretty sure it was Bill Moos that was able to get the majority of the conference to agree to equal revenue sharing, even with USC/UCLA kicking on it. We need the admin to flex their muscles - if they go down kicking and screaming, so be it, but I get the sense that WSU/OSU are going to get played badly.

If they don't have a drawer with a contingency plan(s) as alignment has taken place the past decade or so, and are flat-footed, I would say there is blame. Other universities may also have been caught flat-footed to the USC/UCLA move, but WSU (and OSU too) are unique that they have less leverage overall, so to be not prepared at all would be a killer.

Maybe they do have plans, but it doesn't feel like it so far in the pulse of everything out in the open.

 

[BiggsCoug]

I'll add to that and say that in a lot of ways, this was decided 50 years ago. The big, name brand programs are - for the most part - the ones that were successful in the 50s, 60s, and 70s and established their brand at that time. They built traditions and large followings and have sustained them to the present. This latest realignment remakes college football into more like what it was to our parents and grandparents - with a handful of power programs and everyone else. The divisions are just more formalized now

Agree. You either decided to invest in football decades ago and ran up your success against the likes of WSU or you paid your way in like Oregon. Everyone else is essentially lining up for the 100m dash 200m away from the finish line… while the Bama’s of the world line up at 90m for the 100m…

 

[BiggsCoug]

They may not have the power, but what they can control is how they handle themselves within meetings and other of their counterparts. For all his faults, pretty sure it was Bill Moos that was able to get the majority of the conference to agree to equal revenue sharing, even with USC/UCLA kicking on it. We need the admin to flex their muscles - if they go down kicking and screaming, so be it, but I get the sense that WSU/OSU are going to get played badly.

If they don't have a drawer with a contingency plan(s) as alignment has taken place the past decade or so, and are flat-footed, I would say there is blame. Other universities may also have been caught flat-footed to the USC/UCLA move, but WSU (and OSU too) are unique that they have less leverage overall, so to be not prepared at all would be a killer.

Maybe they do have plans, but it doesn't feel like it so far in the pulse of everything out in the open.

And this is why WSU should never have let Moos walk away/leave. Like him or hate him, he speaks and other schools listen. He doesn’t get bulldozed.

 

[95coug]

They may not have the power, but what they can control is how they handle themselves within meetings and other of their counterparts. For all his faults, pretty sure it was Bill Moos that was able to get the majority of the conference to agree to equal revenue sharing, even with USC/UCLA kicking on it. We need the admin to flex their muscles - if they go down kicking and screaming, so be it, but I get the sense that WSU/OSU are going to get played badly.

If they don't have a drawer with a contingency plan(s) as alignment has taken place the past decade or so, and are flat-footed, I would say there is blame. Other universities may also have been caught flat-footed to the USC/UCLA move, but WSU (and OSU too) are unique that they have less leverage overall, so to be not prepared at all would be a killer.

Maybe they do have plans, but it doesn't feel like it so far in the pulse of everything out in the open.

You simultaneously point out the problem and ignore it. When you have no leverage, you can't drive the conversation.

In the current environment, WSU and OSU bring essentially nothing to the table. None of the major conferences want us - our only chance is to convince the other schools, especially UO and UW, that it's in their interest (or at least not to their detriment) to keep us with them. That's a tough thing to do, because if the Big 10 decides to call them, it's clearly to their benefit to go.

Right now, honestly schools like SDSU have better leverage than we do. They have a major market and a major recruiting ground. We don't. If the Pac-12 decides to expand, the Pac-12 needs SDSU more than SDSU needs the Pac-12. The same is not (and really, never has been) true for us...WSU needs the Pac-12 more than the Pac-12 needs us.

Remember those repetitive off-season debates that used to happen here, where we went back and forth over whether WSU was the most isolated, hard to get to campus in the FBS? You could have the same debate now over what campuses are less attractive to a major conference, and it would be equally hard to come up with someone lower on the list than us. K State might be the closest competition in either debate. I really would not blame the other 8 schools if they voted to drop WSU and OSU and add SDSU and UNLV - both carry much larger markets than we do. I'd hate them forever, but I wouldn't blame them.