Jump to content
The Tower

Realignment talk not going away

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

It is interesting how quickly the narrative changes on who is worst.  First the Big 12, then the ACC, now the Pac 12.   Hell, it wasn't long ago that everyone said the Big Ten sucked at football and they spun it around to smack everyone this past bowl season.   The problem with the Pac is it is so far away and the only conference that can really take is the Big 12, who now has a flag planted about as far east from Dallas as Phoenix is west.  I still think the answer is the Big 12 and the Pac 12 pool their rights in 2023, not poach or realign.  It also wouldn't surprise me if the Big Ten entered into that mix and they were negotiating the three largest states and a lot of connected geography in between.

If you're going to poach, poach close.

I agree with pooling the media rights and doing a scheduling alliance.  Honestly, just adding the two Arizona schools doesn't excite me too much.  Zona historically has a pretty mediocre football program and ASU hasn't exactly been kicking ass in the Pac the last 20 years either.  ASU has three double digit win seasons since 1997 and zero major bowl appearances.  Zona has two double digit win seasons since '97 (one of which was in '98) and one Fiesta Bowl appearance.  I don't think adding either one of those schools is going to add a ton of value.  One of them and CU or Utah might be better since you're adding more media markets but that seems unlikely. 

Pool the media rights, and schedule 2 cross-conference games every season for every team.  Combine that with some high profile cross-conference basketball, baseball and olympic sports match ups and you have pseudo mega-conference.  TCU under Del Conte and now under Donati has been foreshadowing this possibility for years with basketball games against Pac-12 teams at Staples Centers in '17 and '18, baseball games at Dodgers Stadium for several years and OOC football games scheduled against Pac-12 teams 6 out of 7 years beginning in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, mdleast said:

I’m OK with full on realignment vs poaching it just seems there is more poaching talk recently. I remember hearing Deloss speak years ago at an event where he was hinting at a Big 12/Pac 12 supergroup which I was on board with then and now. As to their location/game times, maybe I’m a weirdo as I’m the sad soul who actually likes having Pac 12 after dark games to watch.

I'm fine with them too, as long as they don't involve my team.

And I used to REALLY like that super-late Hawaii game, I'd watch that after a day of tailgating, then going out downtown, then coming home at midnight or 1 AM, and see the Rainbows starting the 2nd quarter or something.  Of course that was years ago when I was a much younger man, they still have that late Hawaii game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2018 at 9:38 AM, Hurtlocker said:

It is interesting how quickly the narrative changes on who is worst.  First the Big 12, then the ACC, now the Pac 12.   Hell, it wasn't long ago that everyone said the Big Ten sucked at football and they spun it around to smack everyone this past bowl season.   The problem with the Pac is it is so far away and the only conference that can really take is the Big 12, who now has a flag planted about as far east from Dallas as Phoenix is west.  I still think the answer is the Big 12 and the Pac 12 pool their rights in 2023, not poach or realign.  It also wouldn't surprise me if the Big Ten entered into that mix and they were negotiating the three largest states and a lot of connected geography in between.

If you're going to poach, poach close.

These very well could be what are known as "trail balloons", in leaking possible configurations of a combined roster of schools from both the XII & PAC...

Talk of Arizona/ Arizona State/ Utah & Colorado looking east is not a new thought, the hook to get them would be to include USC/ UCLA/ Cal/ Stanford too...
 



Which, if you look back at the history of conference realignment, this has happened before with both the Big8 & SWC looking into the same type of setup...
 



A posible 20 school lineup that still places both Oklahoma & Texas in the PAC south, while keeping Iowa State/ Kansas/ Oklahoma State/ TCU & Texas Tech + Rice...
 

Edit: Both the the XII PAC have had leaks of members looking to "defect" or be "absorbed" by the other league, (some of) the latest rumors are from Dude...

 

 

Edited by kopp0e

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would have to be brain dead to listen to a single word "the dude" says. The guy just makes shit up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we still get rid of Baylor.  I think they are going to be a problem cause i don't think anyone wants to be affiliated with that cult.  Much like aggy except no fan base outside of McLennan county.   Didn't the PAC say "hell no" when we ask about bringing them along last time?  Getting rid of Baylor will be best for everyone.

Edited by tonedeaf
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mainly just want the Cali schools...will take the rest as part of the bulk deal but, please, more Cali away games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not helping the PacNet's issues, but satellite services lost 1.5M subscribers in 2017, up from 40k in 2016.    DirecTV lost 554k, after gaining 1.2M in 2016.

 

Major Pay-TV Providers Lost About 1,495,000 Subscribers in 2017

Spoiler

Key findings include:

  • The top six cable companies lost about 660,000 video subscribers in 2017 — compared to a loss of about 275,000 subscribers in 2016
    • In 2017, the top cable providers cumulatively lost 1.4% of video subscribers — compared to a loss of 0.6% in 2016
  • Satellite TV services lost about 1,550,000 subscribers in 2017 — compared to a loss of about 40,000 subscribers in 2016
    • DIRECTV lost 554,000 subscribers in 2017 — compared to a gain of 1,228,000 subscribers in 2016
    • In 2017, DBS services cumulatively lost 4.7% of video subscribers — compared to a loss 0.1% in 2016
  • The top telephone providers lost about 885,000 video subscribers in 2017 — compared to a loss of about 1,590,000 subscribers in 2016
    • AT&T U-verse lost 624,000 subscribers in 2017 — compared to a loss of 1,359,000 subscribers in 2016
    • In 2017, the top Telcos cumulatively lost 8.7% of video subscribers — compared to a loss of 13.6% in 2016
  • The top (publicly reporting) Internet-delivered services added about 1,600,000 subscribers in 2017 — compared to 1,145,000 net adds in 2016
    • Subscribers to the top Internet-delivered services increased by 90% in 2017
  • Traditional pay-TV services (not including Internet-delivered) lost about 3,095,000 subscribers in 2017 — compared to a loss of about 1,905,000 in 2016

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2018 at 9:54 PM, kopp0e said:

These very well could be what are known as "trail balloons", in leaking possible configurations of a combined roster of schools from both the XII & PAC...

Talk of Arizona/ Arizona State/ Utah & Colorado looking east is not a new thought, the hook to get them would be to include USC/ UCLA/ Cal/ Stanford too...
 



Which, if you look back at the history of conference realignment, this has happened before with both the Big8 & SWC looking into the same type of setup...
 



A posible 20 school lineup that still places both Oklahoma & Texas in the PAC south, while keeping Iowa State/ Kansas/ Oklahoma State/ TCU & Texas Tech + Rice...
 

Edit: Both the the XII PAC have had leaks of members looking to "defect" or be "absorbed" by the other league, (some of) the latest rumors are from Dude...

 

 

LOL. There is absolutely a 0.0% chance that Berkeley has expressed any interest whatsoever in joining the Big XII, formal or informal. Will absolutely never, ever happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LTbear said:

LOL. There is absolutely a 0.0% chance that Berkeley has expressed any interest whatsoever in joining the Big XII, formal or informal. Will absolutely never, ever happen. 

Never night be too generous a term, but the only way I see that ever happening is with the 4 Golden State schools & flagships of Washington/ Oregon/ Arizona/ Utah & Colorado merging with the XII (minus Baylor & WVU) UT/ TT/ TCU/ OU/ OSU/ KU & ISU, more or less...

 

It's a far better ootio than joining the B1G with just 1 other school that some conjure in the other thread..! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like our conference. I like the fact that we play true round robins in all of our sports. I don't want our athletes travelling numerous times to the Pacific Northwest. I don't want basketball games that start at 9:00pm. That's what I want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LTbear said:

LOL. There is absolutely a 0.0% chance that Berkeley has expressed any interest whatsoever in joining the Big XII, formal or informal. Will absolutely never, ever happen. 

No doubt.  When i read that tweet i called BS.  Anyone who thinks Cal Berkley is going to be affiliated with anything resembling Baylor is sadly mistaken. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Nolacycling said:

I like our conference. I like the fact that we play true round robins in all of our sports. I don't want our athletes travelling numerous times to the Pacific Northwest. I don't want basketball games that start at 9:00pm. That's what I want.

A combined PAC & XII network would resolve all of any current problems for both conferences, either from a merger or a scheduling alliance...

A conference with brands as:

Washington Huskies
Oregon Ducks
Stanford Cardinal
California Golden Bears
UCLA Bruins
USC Trojans
Arizona Wildcats
Arizona State Sun Devils
Utah Utes
Colorado Buffaloes
Kansas Jayhawks
Oklahoma Sooners
Oklahoma State Cowboys
TCU Horned Frogs
Texas Longhorns
Texas Tech Red Raiders

This lineup of league members would allow for staggering of broadcast & streaming windows for fans in the CTZ/ MTZ & PTZ for games from 11:00am to 10:00pm...

King of the XII Texas (& Oklahoma) would have 1 road game per season in: the Pacific northwest/ Golden State/ Rockies & Arizona, all else regional/ local; with no late starts...

The best part about a pure merger is that teams can be added to a core of solid brands, as possibly Iowa State/ Kansas State/ Rice, to a league of over 100 million residents..!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jdhorn92 said:

No doubt.  When i read that tweet i called BS.  Anyone who thinks Cal Berkley is going to be affiliated with anything resembling Baylor is sadly mistaken. 

Luckily they have no problem taking in Baylor grads to their PhD programs. My time at both Berkeley and the junior college across the Bay, I found my undergrad to be well-respected, but - rightfully so - the graduate programs and research weren't held in nearly so high regard. But the idea (as that tweet lays out) that Cal might leave behind the other Cali schools to join the Big XII with the Zonas and CU is just crazy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s with your Rice obsession? Would they even want to play P5 football? They’d seem to be a place happy to focus on academics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 'stache said:

What’s with your Rice obsession? Would they even want to play P5 football? They’d seem to be a place happy to focus on academics.

Rice occasionally pops up in PAC discussions because it’s a great a school and they think it will “bring the Houston market.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LTbear said:

Rice occasionally pops up in PAC discussions because it’s a great a school and they think it will “bring the Houston market.”

Who is this "they" you speak of?  Are they aware that Rice only has 4,000 undergrads, they can barely compete in a watered down CUSA and that no one outside of West U actually cares about their sports teams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, angelos's frog said:

Who is this "they" you speak of?  Are they aware that Rice only has 4,000 undergrads, they can barely compete in a watered down CUSA and that no one outside of West U actually cares about their sports teams?

They are West Coast realignment junkies and, no, they aren't aware that Rice registers a zero even in Houston.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, angelos's frog said:

Who is this "they" you speak of?  Are they aware that Rice only has 4,000 undergrads, they can barely compete in a watered down CUSA and that no one outside of West U actually cares about their sports teams?

Ricky answered exactly right. I saw a PAC poster a day or so ago talking about how Rice has “a 45,000 seat stadium that could expand to 70,000.” L.O.L.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a PAC school played Rice in an empty 45,000 seat stadium, would it make a sound?

Edited by utee94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kopp0e said:

 

King of the XII Texas (& Oklahoma) would have 1 road game per season in: the Pacific northwest/ Golden State/ Rockies & Arizona, all else regional/ local; with no late starts...

The best part about a pure merger is that teams can be added to a core of solid brands, as possibly Iowa State/ Kansas State/ Rice, to a league of over 100 million residents..!

Every once in a while, against my better judgement, I wander into the realignment thread.  Without fail I am confronted with abject stupidity like this and then I'm good again for a while.

We need a sign, like they have in cafeterias or factories:  We have gone 2,177 days since there was real realignment news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

We have gone 2,177 days since there was real realignment news.

This is the best idea in this thread (counting the Shaggy years too) in a long time.  If we could get a clock that counts up like the one that used to count down on the football board, that would be awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 'stache said:

What’s with your Rice obsession? Would they even want to play P5 football? They’d seem to be a place happy to focus on academics.

I wouldn't say a Rice obsession, just adding an extra team in the Lone Star State that is an AAU/ highest ranked in state; remember there was a time when Stanford was crap too...

Big XVI: Texas/ Texas Tech/ TCU/ Rice/ Oklahoma/ Oklahoma State & California/ Stanford/ USC/ UCLA/ Arizona/ Arizona State + Colorado leaves three spots for KU/ KSU & ISU... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/30/2018 at 9:48 AM, angelos's frog said:

Who is this "they" you speak of?  Are they aware that Rice only has 4,000 undergrads, they can barely compete in a watered down CUSA and that no one outside of West U actually cares about their sports teams?

so...

Just like TCU with much stronger academics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, slorch said:

so...

Just like TCU with much stronger academics?

The main difference is TCU cares about athletics and Rice and its students really don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rice is the only school I know of in FBS that can fit their entire living alumni base (estimated 60,000) in their stadium. (70,000 capacity overall but they’ve added tarps to cap it at 45,000 recently)

 

 

Apply that, the lack of any winning brand outside of baseball, and that both Baylor and Tech have more Houston alumni to guess at their market share and it’s not going to be anywhere close to the other former SWC schools. SMU and UH have far more drawing power. I like Rice but I’d be shocked if they moved to any P5 league any time soon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

So they must have had a large casual following of Houston residents?

They really did back in the 50's, before the NFL became America's sport.  They were a national power.  Sports has changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Why does Rice have such a large stadium?

Why choose building a 60+K stadium as their goal? And some may well ask, why climb the highest mountain? Why, 91 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas? 

They chose to build that stadium not because filling it is easy, but because it is hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, DeadArmadillo said:

They really did back in the 50's, before the NFL became America's sport.  They were a national power.  Sports has changed.

That's kind of hard to wrap my head around.

Similar to how the University of Minnesota was a power house with a rabid fanbase until the Vikings came along.  You talk about stadium capacities as they pertain to student/alumni bases and U of M is like the reverse of Rice.  Where Rice can hold their entire living alumni base, Minnesota can't even hold their entire current student body (and still don't usually sell out unless playing Iowa or Wisconsin, who bring 10-20K of their own fans).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

That's kind of hard to wrap my head around.

 

Sure, but you're not a Texan.  I'm not surprised at all that Rice would build a huge stadium in 1950 in Houston, TX.  

The Vikings example is a good one.  They sabotaged UM the same way (it seems) that the Oilers sabotaged Rice.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SnowAggy said:

Sure, but you're not a Texan.  I'm not surprised at all that Rice would build a huge stadium in 1950 in Houston, TX.  

The Vikings example is a good one.  They sabotaged UM the same way (it seems) that the Oilers sabotaged Rice.  

I was just referring to the idea of Rice being a power.  Not that they would have built a huge stadium.

If Rice football was the most popular thing in the Houston sports world, it absolutely justified that.  It's the part about Rice football being the biggest deal in the Houston sports world that blows my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

That's kind of hard to wrap my head around.

Similar to how the University of Minnesota was a power house with a rabid fanbase until the Vikings came along.  You talk about stadium capacities as they pertain to student/alumni bases and U of M is like the reverse of Rice.  Where Rice can hold their entire living alumni base, Minnesota can't even hold their entire current student body (and still don't usually sell out unless playing Iowa or Wisconsin, who bring 10-20K of their own fans).

The Cotton Bowl was also expanded to 68-70k seats back in the late 40's to accommodate demand for SMU football.  SMU played in the Cotton Bowl until the late 70's but once the Cowboys came to Dallas, interest in SMU football decreased rapidly.  Now  SMU plays in a 32k seat stadium that is usually 1/3 full and the Cotton Bowl is used for the Texas/OU game, a third tier bowl game and a couple of other college games every year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, angelos's frog said:

The Cotton Bowl was also expanded to 68-70k seats back in the late 40's to accommodate demand for SMU football.  SMU played in the Cotton Bowl until the late 70's but once the Cowboys came to Dallas, interest in SMU football decreased rapidly.  Now  SMU plays in a 32k seat stadium that is usually 1/3 full and the Cotton Bowl is used for the Texas/OU game, a third tier bowl game and a couple of other college games every year. 

Interesting.  I always assumed that the Cotton Bowl was that large due to the Cotton Bowl game and Red River.

I wonder if either would have been able to maintain a viable fanbase if they had remained in a power conference.

Edited by Al_4_ISU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

That's kind of hard to wrap my head around.

Similar to how the University of Minnesota was a power house with a rabid fanbase until the Vikings came along.  You talk about stadium capacities as they pertain to student/alumni bases and U of M is like the reverse of Rice.  Where Rice can hold their entire living alumni base, Minnesota can't even hold their entire current student body (and still don't usually sell out unless playing Iowa or Wisconsin, who bring 10-20K of their own fans).

Yes, it is odd, now.  It was hard for me to understand as a young lad in the early 70's.  And that was just 10 years removed from Navy being a Top Ten team and 20 years from Rice and some Ivy League schools and others of that ilk dominating the CFB world.  

Makes you wonder how much America's sports world will change in the next 20-30 years, or even the next decade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Interesting.  I always assumed that the Cotton Bowl was that large due to the Cotton Bowl game and Red River.

I wonder if either would have been able to maintain a viable fanbase if they had remained in a power conference.

Consider the case of Pitt as well.  Their story is similar to SMU and Rice.  I don't know their attendance figures, (and I'm too lazy to look them up) but I doubt they are much better than SMU.

Edited by PhillyD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PhillyD said:

Consider the case of Pitt as well.  Their story is similar to SMU and Rice.  I don't know their attendance figures, (and I'm too lazy to look them up) but I doubt they are much better than SMU.

I've always got the impression that their fanbase is just fairweather.  I think they draw well when they're above average, but numbers fall off quickly whenever they're mediocre to bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to tell.  They have been mediocre at best for the past 20 years.  I lived in Pittsburgh from 2000 - 2004 and Larry Fitzgerald was there during that time.  I'm convinced that if he had he played at any other D1 school, he would have won Heisman.  In Pittsburgh at that time, if you weren't a Steeler or Mario Lemieux, you could get no ink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I've always got the impression that their fanbase is just fairweather.  I think they draw well when they're above average, but numbers fall off quickly whenever they're mediocre to bad.

Spent a lot of time there and in my anecdotal football experience, you have the Steelers represented on every cubical wall and SUV.   Some of that group also like Penn State or West Virginia.  And sometimes you walk into a local watering hole and find the rare alumni from another school, including Pitt.   If you do they'll be telling you about Tony Dorset and Marino shortly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, PhillyD said:

It's hard to tell.  They have been mediocre at best for the past 20 years.  I lived in Pittsburgh from 2000 - 2004 and Larry Fitzgerald was there during that time.  I'm convinced that if he had he played at any other D1 school, he would have won Heisman.  In Pittsburgh at that time, if you weren't a Steeler or Mario Lemieux, you could get no ink.

That sounds an awful lot like Minnesota.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...