Scott Barnes also told Nik Daschel in sit down interview, that PAC 2 is looking to rebuild the PAC to PAC 8 with BEST possible colleges, and best possible G5's from best G5 conferences, sources(like BSU, Fresno St, SDSU, UNLV, Memphis, Tulane, etc(He isn't, can't, shouldn't say something like "We are going to Poach BSU, SDSU, Fresno St, UNLV, Memphis, Tulane". But he pretty much said that, or hinted at that by saying BEST POSSIBLE COLLEGES, AND G5'S POSSIBLE, FROM BEST G5 CONFERENCES, SOURCES, as the best colleges, G5's from the best G5 conferences, sources, Would be BSU, Fresno, SDSU, UNLV, Memphis, Tulane, UTSA, Airforce, Utah St, CSU, North Texas, Liberty(MAAC(12-0), NDSU(Regularly been the FCS national champion last 50 years, BEST FCS team, should not be FCS, should be a G5 in FBS, upsets teams like Michigan types, Like a Apalachian St).
Scott Barnes told Nik Daschel that PAC 2 are in serious talks, negotiations with ACC for 2025 schedule,
- Thread starter mikalalas
- Start date
Again, we have no clout, no leverage, no long term financial security, so guarantee(s) of anything other than 1 seat at the table at the end of the year.
There are schools for whom football is a priority and part of their identity. Then there is us and the rest of the G5. And a good chunk of the P4 schools, but we got singled out for... reasons.
If we can't get an invite to a P4 conference, and it doesn't sound like that's going to happen in the immediate future, then the goal has to be to land in (or build) the best G5 conference out there. The money dip will be a rough transition, but having a home in a league where the conference champion earns an invitation to the playoff will be a nice consolation prize.
What I'd really like to see is that we use this time (and holdover money) to make a similar move for the Olympic sports. Do something outside the box and band all of the West coast programs together to form a 24 program PacWest conference for everything other than football.
What I'd really like to see is that we use this time (and holdover money) to make a similar move for the Olympic sports. Do something outside the box and band all of the West coast programs together to form a 24 program PacWest conference for everything other than football.
The only way this works and the only way it builds real parity (which no one in NCAA wants) is to make tiered payouts that actually reward the G5 team for getting there. Spread that dough out. It doesn't have to be equal, but it has to make sense. What I don't want to see is the 5-12 matchup get scraps in the first round ( because the G5 will ALWAYS be the 12) and basically get nothing for being the P4 bitch in a game they more than likely will lose.
Otherwise the G5 is just whoring themselves out for scraps and bodybag games. Again, why? Its not creating "wealth" so the football team can get better. It would barely fund the title 9 programs. So again, what's the point?
I heard last weekend (at game, from reliable sources) that 3 options are on the table:
1. Rebuild.
2. Big-12.
3. ACC West.
I think the ACC knows FSU and Clemson are gone, they will need to rebuild, so I truly believe the ACC West is probably where this ends up at some point. 2 years. 5 years. Who knows.
1. Rebuild.
2. Big-12.
3. ACC West.
I think the ACC knows FSU and Clemson are gone, they will need to rebuild, so I truly believe the ACC West is probably where this ends up at some point. 2 years. 5 years. Who knows.
I mean, I don't hate it.
I don't love it. But I don't hate it.
I do hate having to be associated with Kal and FanTurd again.
Scheduling with the ACC will get the TV ratings up, and unless the ACC breaks up in the next 12 months, I think you will see the pac 2 carry on for another year or two. We won't be a power 4 team, and the power 4 conferences won't exist in 1-3 years.
Let's be real here as Wittingham said and many others in CF, there will be a power league of 40-60 teams in 1-3 years, they will form their own league, have their own rules, and only play those 40-60 teams. I think when teams realize the cost of being competitive in this group, now that dollars and academic participation are no longer an issue, that number will be closer to 40 something. Presently there are 67 teams in power 4 conferences plus Notre Dame and OSU and WSU. So that means there will be at least 8-30 teams that are now power 4 that will be without a home, and that is when we form a new PAC 12. I don't think we will have to steal anyone, schools will be looking for a home. We can start a new Division, set caps on NIL, set academic criteria similar to today, and so on, basically bring athletics back to normal. Do you think Duke, Northwestern, or Standford will allow athletes on their teams that don't participate in university studies? Do you think schools like Cal, AZ, ASU, Indiana, Iowa St W. VA and so on will have the money needed to compete? They'll set it up like a NFL Franchise, you have to put so much in to join the league, that way they can weed out the schools that don't really have the money. Yes, it would be nice to say we are in a power 4 conference, but in 2-3 years, that term will be history. I think WSU and OSU are going to have to be more patient on the conference realignment, and not all is lost , there will be a lot of good teams and universities that fall out of that top 40 group, and will form another division. There are 134 teams in division 1 football, that will leave 90+ teams to figure out what they want to do. I think there will be a separate football division, and perhaps some relegation between the upper tier and next tier. I think all other sports will go back to more regionalize leagues. It will be chaos for a while, but it will sort itself out, once the rich schools and networks figure out who they want to be in their elite college football league.
Let's be real here as Wittingham said and many others in CF, there will be a power league of 40-60 teams in 1-3 years, they will form their own league, have their own rules, and only play those 40-60 teams. I think when teams realize the cost of being competitive in this group, now that dollars and academic participation are no longer an issue, that number will be closer to 40 something. Presently there are 67 teams in power 4 conferences plus Notre Dame and OSU and WSU. So that means there will be at least 8-30 teams that are now power 4 that will be without a home, and that is when we form a new PAC 12. I don't think we will have to steal anyone, schools will be looking for a home. We can start a new Division, set caps on NIL, set academic criteria similar to today, and so on, basically bring athletics back to normal. Do you think Duke, Northwestern, or Standford will allow athletes on their teams that don't participate in university studies? Do you think schools like Cal, AZ, ASU, Indiana, Iowa St W. VA and so on will have the money needed to compete? They'll set it up like a NFL Franchise, you have to put so much in to join the league, that way they can weed out the schools that don't really have the money. Yes, it would be nice to say we are in a power 4 conference, but in 2-3 years, that term will be history. I think WSU and OSU are going to have to be more patient on the conference realignment, and not all is lost , there will be a lot of good teams and universities that fall out of that top 40 group, and will form another division. There are 134 teams in division 1 football, that will leave 90+ teams to figure out what they want to do. I think there will be a separate football division, and perhaps some relegation between the upper tier and next tier. I think all other sports will go back to more regionalize leagues. It will be chaos for a while, but it will sort itself out, once the rich schools and networks figure out who they want to be in their elite college football league.
Last edited:
What motivation will the networks have to cover anything outside of the NFL-lite? Yes, there will be some money to be had there, but will it be worth the investment in time and resources, especially when compared directly to the billions to be made from NFL-lite? I just saying that the mouse has already shown their complete disdain and disregard for anything that doesn't have a obscenely large cashflow attached to it.
Keep in mind that with only 40-60 teams (prob closer to 40) playing, there will not be enough leagues for all the networks. So if you feel that the networks are the key to the future, there will be some networks available. They won't pay at the rate that the 40+ league(s) get, but there will be networks and they will pay something. So exposure will be available.
The other thing that I'm grappling with is how quickly streaming will become a major income source...and will it eventually supplant the networks?
Both of these things mean there will be both some money and some exposure for a league below the 40+.
The other thing that I'm grappling with is how quickly streaming will become a major income source...and will it eventually supplant the networks?
Both of these things mean there will be both some money and some exposure for a league below the 40+.
I am not saying it's a great plan or a great idea, and I hope if blows up in the networks faces. However, this is the direction it is headed for now. There are a lot of interesting articles about the money, where it comes from, and how moving leagues has hurt teams that have moved more than helped them. Nebraska and Maryland are two prime examples, not only did they have less success in the field and on the court, their contributions dropped over 25%. Many of the top tier football teams are spending 15-20 million in NIL money in football alone right now.
Here is an interesting link to read.
NIL/Revenue/ 2nd thoughts
Click on the "Move to the Big 10 Blues" with in the article talk about how contributions to the program and university drop when the teams don't have success. A lot of articles on this, which are interesting reads. The College "Super Conference" will work for many teams but not all, in the end that's why I think it's chances of success are 50/50 at best, but it appears that's where it's going. A team that finishes 7-5 or 8-4 every year, if they are lucky, in the new league, that used to win championships, is now probably losing contributions.
I suppose the appetite for football is pretty ravenous. The networks could have all the cool kids on Saturday and all the loser rejects on Th/Fri games.
Exactly. And "talks with the ACC". We are talking about Cal and Stanford's open slots I assume.
And they may not be welcome elsewhere.
Then again, money talks and they have both each have plenty of it.
I think we are seeing, also, signs of major apathy of CFB fandom due to realignment. The greedy decision makers are dooming the sport and when the ratings tank across the board, they will end up just shooting themselves in their own feet. Revenues will tank and the sport will become as popular as 8 year olds playing Quiddish in someone's backyard.
This is the outcome I'm hoping for, but unfortunately I think you're dead wrong. Oregon (according to their fans and the media honks) thinks they have a guaranteed ticket to the playoff every year now, as does SC. They may not be wrong, but either way the fans will be watching.
March Madness is a success because everyone is involved. I think coming up with a super conference is a huge mistake because it limits involvement, but it will happen for now because everyone has gotten greedy. They should have just left the conferences alone and expanded the playoff, which would have generated much more revenue.
This brilliant Coach had a plan, but no one listened.
Playoff format
RIP coach, miss you!
This brilliant Coach had a plan, but no one listened.
Playoff format
RIP coach, miss you!
If winning mattered, UCLA would not have gotten an invite. I'm still not sure what does matter.
Nothing really earth shaking. As I've said before, the key for the Big XII and ACC are to band together in some way. Whether that means a scheduling agreement (excluding SEC and B1G from OOC game), a straight merger, or something else. Strength in numbers is the only play I see against the B1G and SEC.
Scott Barnes did not say, and I did not say anything about joining, merger, merging, etc, with ACC, Big 12, MWC, AAC, etc.
He only said that PAC 2 leadership in official behind the scene, serious talks, and unofficial negotiations, about a possible 2025 scheduling between the PAC 2, and ACC.
Tho Scott Barnes didn't say to Nick Daschel anything about the possibility of scheduling games with Big 12, Scott Barnes either has been reported as saying, an or sources have reported that Scott Barnes leaked, an or reported that Scott Barnes, PAC leadership is talking to Big 12 about the possibility of scheduling a couple, few, etc, Big 12 games.
Nothing about a Merger.
That said Jim Williams of DC Press Corps, has gone on record, reported, in the past, that the ACC has said there are semi official, semi unofficial CONTINGENCY offers on standby for WSU, OSU, BSU, Fresno St, SDSU, Memphis, Tulane, USF, in case ACC loses FSU, Clemson, North Carolina, Virginia, Miami, and that if that happens, the ACC will extend those contingency offers to WSU, OSU, etc, to join ACC.
Also as Loyal has said in another thread, Loyal has confirmed that Scott Barnes has talked to Nick Daschel in a sit down interview, and talked about how PAC leadership is in serious talks with ACC on, about 2025 schedule.
Some crow for Loyal, 95, Bleed, etc, as when I say that Scott Barnes said X to Nick Daschel, etc, I'm not wrong, not lying, not making it up, etc.
He only said that PAC 2 leadership in official behind the scene, serious talks, and unofficial negotiations, about a possible 2025 scheduling between the PAC 2, and ACC.
Tho Scott Barnes didn't say to Nick Daschel anything about the possibility of scheduling games with Big 12, Scott Barnes either has been reported as saying, an or sources have reported that Scott Barnes leaked, an or reported that Scott Barnes, PAC leadership is talking to Big 12 about the possibility of scheduling a couple, few, etc, Big 12 games.
Nothing about a Merger.
That said Jim Williams of DC Press Corps, has gone on record, reported, in the past, that the ACC has said there are semi official, semi unofficial CONTINGENCY offers on standby for WSU, OSU, BSU, Fresno St, SDSU, Memphis, Tulane, USF, in case ACC loses FSU, Clemson, North Carolina, Virginia, Miami, and that if that happens, the ACC will extend those contingency offers to WSU, OSU, etc, to join ACC.
Also as Loyal has said in another thread, Loyal has confirmed that Scott Barnes has talked to Nick Daschel in a sit down interview, and talked about how PAC leadership is in serious talks with ACC on, about 2025 schedule.
Some crow for Loyal, 95, Bleed, etc, as when I say that Scott Barnes said X to Nick Daschel, etc, I'm not wrong, not lying, not making it up, etc.
Glad you feel vindicated Mik.
As further vindication, here is the link to Jim Williams 6-month-old musing about the Pac-2 and ACC. Of course, if you go back a few months more (link), his prediction included neither WSU or OSU. Note that Memphis and Tulane were on both lists. Thus they are no way candidates for the ridiculous Pac-8 scenario as they would wait for the ACC to call.
The six top ACC expansion candidates if Florida State and others leave
The ACC may be in the market to add new programs if Florida State and other schools leave the conference
ACC Vetting Top Expansion Candidates With Possible Departures Looming - Sports Illustrated All Cardinal News, Analysis and More
The ACC may be already planning to replace some programs
...semi official, semi unofficial...
Wait...aren't these the exact same thing? Taihtsat
Glad you feel vindicated Mik.
As further vindication, here is the link to Jim Williams 6-month-old musing about the Pac-2 and ACC. Of course, if you go back a few months more (link), his prediction included neither WSU or OSU. Note that Memphis and Tulane were on both lists. Thus they are no way candidates for the ridiculous Pac-8 scenario as they would wait for the ACC to call.
The six top ACC expansion candidates if Florida State and others leave
The ACC may be in the market to add new programs if Florida State and other schools leave the conferencewww.si.com
ACC Vetting Top Expansion Candidates With Possible Departures Looming - Sports Illustrated All Cardinal News, Analysis and More
The ACC may be already planning to replace some programs
IF ACC falls apart in the next 1.5 year(s), then Memphis, Tulane, will probably either:
1. Join ACC.
2. If ACC falls apart to the point where BIG 12, SEC, BIG 10 raid FSU, Clemson, North Carolina, Virginia, Miami, Louisville, Pitt, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, leaving Boston College, Syracuse, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest behind. 3,4,5 teams left behind in ACC, wont rebuild ACC, and would instead join mix of either, an or Big East, AAC, MAAC, MWC, PAC. In that situation, if that happened Memphis, Tulane would NOT join ACC, and instead would either stay in AAC, OR join a PAC 8, IF that PAC 8 was good enough, IF that PAC 8 had BSU, SDSU, Fresno St, UNLV, UTSA, etc.
PAC 2 will try to get Memphis, Tulane at some point. IF PAC 2 does not join ACC, IF PAC 2 rebuilds PAC 8, IF PAC 2 either gets or tries to get BSU, SDSU, Fresno St, UNLV.
IF ACC does not fall apart, and IF PAC 2 does not join ACC, then that probably would mean that Memphis, and Tulane would not join ACC either, and would instead join a PAC 8 of BSU, SDSU, Fresno St, UNLV, WSU, OSU.
Memphis, Tulane won't wait forever for the ACC to fall apart, and Memphis, Tulane won't settle for only about 7,8,9 mil per team per year, AAC media deal, and won't settle for where a 12-0, 11-1, MAAC champ, MWC champ, goes to CFP over, instead of the AAC champ, Memphis, Tulane, etc.
Instead of settling for that, they would join a PAC 8 of BSU, SDSU, Fresno St, UNLV, Memphis, Tulane, WSU, OSU, and get 16 to 22 mil per team per year, and where if they, Memphis, Tulane goes at least 10-2, PAC 8 champ, they would goto CFP, over AAC, MAAC, MWC, champs.
This kind of stuff is logical, reasonable, rational, makes sense, been reported(things don't have to be reported by ESPN, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, CSPAN, etc, to be credible, logical, reasonable, rational, make sense, likely, etc.
But go ahead be illogical, be Baghdad Bob, be those who said that they PAC 12 wasn't going to fall apart, and continue to illogically think that if it's not on ESPN, FOX, CNN, etc....
"This kind of stuff is logical, reasonable, rational, makes sense,"
Sorry buddy, it is none of the above. But keep riding that pony.
As I stated before, the ACC is not going to fall apart because they are a valuable commodity for ESPN from a programming standpoint (100% tie in) and financial perspective (ACCN profits shared 50/50).
ESPN will react to protect their own financial interests when they have to.
If the ACC had to replace one or two teams, I think (IMHO) the two most likely choices would be stay out EAST with the addition of UConn (New York City Nielsen Market/ former Big East member) and USF (Florida Market and AAU membership/ former Big East member) OR go WEST with the additions of Washington State and Oregon State. Western pod with Cal, Standford, SMU, Washington State, Oregon State to limit travel expensives makes sense.
If 4 teams had to be replaced, then WSU and OSU may seriously be in the running (IMO).
Whatever happens you can be sure ESPN will be involved in the discussions.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
ESPN will react to protect their own financial interests when they have to.
If the ACC had to replace one or two teams, I think (IMHO) the two most likely choices would be stay out EAST with the addition of UConn (New York City Nielsen Market/ former Big East member) and USF (Florida Market and AAU membership/ former Big East member) OR go WEST with the additions of Washington State and Oregon State. Western pod with Cal, Standford, SMU, Washington State, Oregon State to limit travel expensives makes sense.
If 4 teams had to be replaced, then WSU and OSU may seriously be in the running (IMO).
Whatever happens you can be sure ESPN will be involved in the discussions.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
