Madmartigan wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 7:54 am

Slim80 wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 11:58 pm

BearLakeMonster wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 9:50 pm

SLB wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 8:26 pm

In the tweet, "there are more." We could be in that more category.

We probably are, but I think it's telling that we weren't among the names he mentioned.

This is exactly what I’ve been worried about. I’m afraid my skepticism towards USU’s appeal is more closer to reality than not.

Anyone that thinks we are in the list of names being seriously considered is in for a rude awakening. We aren’t even tier of expansion candidates in the MW let alone the PAC-12.

This!

Madmartigan wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 7:54 am

Slim80 wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 11:58 pm

BearLakeMonster wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 9:50 pm

SLB wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 8:26 pm

In the tweet, "there are more." We could be in that more category.

We probably are, but I think it's telling that we weren't among the names he mentioned.

This is exactly what I’ve been worried about. I’m afraid my skepticism towards USU’s appeal is more closer to reality than not.

NM

If I am a TV executive right now, I am basically walking away from the PAC-XX. Everyone is looking to get out, and the schools looking to get in will not add any value. How much value does a PAC-XX made up of Oregon State, Washington State and a bunch of MWC schools?

swordsman1989 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 11:14 am

If I am a TV executive right now, I am basically walking away from the PAC-XX. Everyone is looking to get out, and the schools looking to get in will not add any value. How much value does a PAC-XX made up of Oregon State, Washington State and a bunch of MWC schools?

Not necessarily. The TV big-wigs still value the PST time slots that can't filled with just a smattering of USC and UCLA home games. It's a HUGE bargaining chip and it no doubt lowers the value but it still has value.

Madmartigan wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 7:54 am

Slim80 wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 11:58 pm

BearLakeMonster wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 9:50 pm

SLB wrote: ↑

July 28th, 2023, 8:26 pm

In the tweet, "there are more." We could be in that more category.

We probably are, but I think it's telling that we weren't among the names he mentioned.

This is exactly what I’ve been worried about. I’m afraid my skepticism towards USU’s appeal is more closer to reality than not.

Anyone that thinks we are in the list of names being seriously considered is in for a rude awakening. We aren’t even tier one of expansion candidates in the MW let alone the PAC-12.

Very true.

PAC 12 can literally buyout the top of the G5 world to stay P5 in reality. It would be a 5th wheel of the P5 world. The MWC and AAC suffer from being in a smaller TV deal and small schools mixed in that dilute the money. We are among the top G5 world with a notable population around us which makes similar to Oregon State and Washington State.

Slim80 wrote: ↑

July 26th, 2023, 6:13 pm

Aglicious wrote: ↑

July 26th, 2023, 5:55 pm

tkmad wrote: ↑

July 26th, 2023, 5:37 pm

Conference realignments are interesting. Unfortunately I feel that this is not a good scenario for USU.

Wondering what's your thought behind that?

I would think Utah moving out of the PAC is USU's only shot of being attractive to whatever best conference of leftovers remains in the west.

I’m afraid it’s going to take more than just Utah leaving for USU to be an attractive option IF the PAC turns out to be the more attractive option. With the way they have screwed around with their TV deal and are losing members they appear pathetic. SDSU, Fresno, UNLV, Boise, CSU, Wyoming are all in front of USU when it comes to invites.

Gonna burst in like cool aid man, late to the party,

There isn’t a world where Wyoming is more attractive than us. Now, Fresno is more valuable to the Big 12 than we are, but if Utah Leaves. Does the Pac 12 want to add ANOTHER California school, with a very low academic reputation over staying in Utah with a very good academic institution? I think there’s an argument we’d be more attractive than them.

SLB wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 2:11 pm

PAC 12 can literally buyout the top of the G5 world to stay P5 in reality. It would be a 5th wheel of the P5 world. The MWC and AAC suffer from being in a smaller TV deal and small schools mixed in that dilute the money. We are among the top G5 world with a notable population around us which makes similar to Oregon State and Washington State.

The issue is that buying the top G5 is just creating a G5 conference. We have 25k seat stadium. That is a g5 stadium. I cling to the hope that our tv audience, which has been touted as decent, is better enough than our peers.

Also if true that Oregon is going to big12 then thing look bleak for Aggies. I think we are part of the MWC 6 or whatever is left. (This is because Utah will not make it to b12. I hope they do ).

SLB wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 2:11 pm

PAC 12 can literally buyout the top of the G5 world to stay P5 in reality. It would be a 5th wheel of the P5 world. The MWC and AAC suffer from being in a smaller TV deal and small schools mixed in that dilute the money. We are among the top G5 world with a notable population around us which makes similar to Oregon State and Washington State.

Is that with all the $50 million the PAC owes Comcast? The nonexistent buyout from Colorado’s exit? I’m sure Stanford and Cal will love the thought of being affiliated with half the MW.

I think the PAC survives by poaching MW and AAC schools, but there is a possibility the cost to move doesn’t make financial sense for schools. The only thing that is certain is the 2024 PAC conference schedule will be a disaster. The teams left have financial commitments that relied on PAC money, and they aren’t able to dilute the pot to help new schools join up.

Hiw can they poach the MWC with such high exit fees abd no TV deal?

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Here’s the thing with college football.

No one cares about the pac anymore. People watch it because it’s football on after all the other football games. USC and UCLA were once great. USC hasn’t been great since the sanctions. They’d be a team like Arkansas in the SEC (Arkansas wasn’t bad this year). Whereas they were once a championship contender. Utah lost to a bad Florida team. They get eyes because they’re on at 10 and bars in the south like having games on the TV.

Although I’d rather be in the pac than the mwc- you have to wonder if the premium the PAC thinks it deserves is truly worth it- especially without prime (who I predict to be a bust), usc or ucla.

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

I talked about this fact years about whoever the next AD is someone who can make us into a P5 team and is from the PAC 12.
Leon Jackson has Big 12, ACC, and PAC 12 connections (he worked at Pitt, Kansas State, and currently at Colorado). I would think that Jackson will get a serious look.

aggies22 wrote:I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Don’t like hearing that, especially from someone as connected as you. Always appreciate your posts however.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Yeah this has an early 2000s feeling. Could be bad

Cheecho6 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:49 pm

aggies22 wrote:I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Don’t like hearing that, especially from someone as connected as you. Always appreciate your posts however.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The MW can backfill if/when necessary with UTEP/NMSU etc.

There is a lot at play here and the situation is fluid.

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

True statement, and many on this board keep pushing mr. bovee.

mike1126 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:55 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

True statement, and many on this board keep pushing mr. bovee.

Far more important if the president has PAC-12 connections than the AD, often the AD's are not involved in the process outside of a consulting role, but yes, please, both of you, tell me more about why Mr. Bovee shouldn't get the job.

And no I'm not pushing for Mr. Bovee to get the job, I'm just tired of all of the petty small town (I can't express myself without swearing) political games that go on around this program.

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Can you explain in more detail what you mean by this? What does “not surviving” mean? USU being stuck in what’s left of the MW? Going FCS? Dropping athletics altogether?

As I see it, we’re very much a plucky little “have not” in the college football landscape and will always be a plucky little “have not.” It just kinda is what it is.

I think our best case scenario involves Utah, Arizona, and ASU all joining the Big XII.

With reports being that the Big 12 only plans to add one more (my guess is Arizona), I think the most likely scenario is that the PAC-12 backfills with San Diego St and SMU, and the MW stands pat otherwise and enjoys the fruits of SDSU’s tourney credits.

Aggieiester wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 7:54 pm

mike1126 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:55 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

True statement, and many on this board keep pushing mr. bovee.

Far more important if the president has PAC-12 connections than the AD, often the AD's are not involved in the process outside of a consulting role, but yes, please, both of you, tell me more about why Mr. Bovee shouldn't get the job.

And no I'm not pushing for Mr. Bovee to get the job, I'm just tired of all of the petty small town (I can't express myself without swearing) political games that go on around this program.

Do you prefer the big city (I can't express myself without swearing) political games that go on in larger programs?

trevordude wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 8:31 pm

Aggieiester wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 7:54 pm

mike1126 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:55 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

True statement, and many on this board keep pushing mr. bovee.

Far more important if the president has PAC-12 connections than the AD, often the AD's are not involved in the process outside of a consulting role, but yes, please, both of you, tell me more about why Mr. Bovee shouldn't get the job.

And no I'm not pushing for Mr. Bovee to get the job, I'm just tired of all of the petty small town (I can't express myself without swearing) political games that go on around this program.

Do you prefer the big city (I can't express myself without swearing) political games that go on in larger programs?

How about none of it

Too many moving parts to freak out yet.

mike1126 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:55 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

True statement, and many on this board keep pushing mr. bovee.

We could pull a coup and hire away the U's AD and we're still not getting into the PAC so long as Utah is in it.

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 8:13 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Can you explain in more detail what you mean by this? What does “not surviving” mean? USU being stuck in what’s left of the MW? Going FCS? Dropping athletics altogether?

As I see it, we’re very much a plucky little “have not” in the college football landscape and will always be a plucky little “have not.” It just kinda is what it is.

I think our best case scenario involves Utah, Arizona, and ASU all joining the Big XII.

With reports being that the Big 12 only plans to add one more (my guess is Arizona), I think the most likely scenario is that the PAC-12 backfills with San Diego St and SMU, and the MW stands pat otherwise and enjoys the fruits of SDSU’s tourney credits.

Agreed, depends on why you mean by survive. We’re in a good position to stay in the strongest of G5 conferences. From my perspective, I think we will do best in a regional conference, and as long as we still have access to this “playoff”, supposing we have more really good years on the horizon, then I will be more than content sticking with our regional rivals. And if we lose SDSU and one or two more, whatever, who cares.

Things are shifting and changing, but we are about where we were five years ago. 100M per year isn’t going to help Ohio state win more. They were already getting the best recruits. I do not want to see USU get on a monetary level like that, I think it’s morally wrong to have universities, especially state-funded entities, sponsoring semi-pro athletics. I want the Aggies to win as much as anyone, but this whole thing is wildly out of control. I only hope that these programs and players are getting taxed like the rest of us.

To be honest if the PAC loses 1 more and possibly up to 3 more teams I am confused on teams would be super excited to join that conference. They currently have no media deal past next year and are struggling to get one. If 3 teams leave the PAC I would love to see the teams remaining from both conferences join to make a super conference in the West. I know it would never happen but on paper would be a really good conference and could get a solid TV deal. Whatever happens I hope it goes quickly.

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Won't matter at all if Utah stays in the PAC 12. Part if their institutional goal is to stick to USU in every way possible.

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 9:46 pm

To be honest if the PAC loses 1 more and possibly up to 3 more teams I am confused on teams would be super excited to join that conference. They currently have no media deal past next year and are struggling to get one. If 3 teams leave the PAC I would love to see the teams remaining from both conferences join to make a super conference in the West. I know it would never happen but on paper would be a really good conference and could get a solid TV deal. Whatever happens I hope it goes quickly.

I wonder how the buyout would work? Seems like the steep MWC buyout and uncertain PAC future will keep things together for now. We'll see how long that lasts

GeoAg wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 10:15 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Won't matter at all if Utah stays in the PAC 12. Part if their institutional goal is to stick to USU in every way possible.

They do make it tough.

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 8:13 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 6:27 pm

I don't see us surviving this round of realignment unless an AD is hired that has PAC-12 connections.

Can you explain in more detail what you mean by this? What does “not surviving” mean? USU being stuck in what’s left of the MW? Going FCS? Dropping athletics altogether?

As I see it, we’re very much a plucky little “have not” in the college football landscape and will always be a plucky little “have not.” It just kinda is what it is.

I think our best case scenario involves Utah, Arizona, and ASU all joining the Big XII.

With reports being that the Big 12 only plans to add one more (my guess is Arizona), I think the most likely scenario is that the PAC-12 backfills with San Diego St and SMU, and the MW stands pat otherwise and enjoys the fruits of SDSU’s tourney credits.

I just worry that all this is going down at pretty much the worst possible time for us. We are very much in limbo and really have no representation right now. I just want what's best for the program. I'm glad I don't make the call because I wouldn't want to screw this up.

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 9:46 pm

To be honest if the PAC loses 1 more and possibly up to 3 more teams I am confused on teams would be super excited to join that conference. They currently have no media deal past next year and are struggling to get one. If 3 teams leave the PAC I would love to see the teams remaining from both conferences join to make a super conference in the West. I know it would never happen but on paper would be a really good conference and could get a solid TV deal. Whatever happens I hope it goes quickly.

dogie wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 10:33 pm

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

July 29th, 2023, 9:46 pm

To be honest if the PAC loses 1 more and possibly up to 3 more teams I am confused on teams would be super excited to join that conference. They currently have no media deal past next year and are struggling to get one. If 3 teams leave the PAC I would love to see the teams remaining from both conferences join to make a super conference in the West. I know it would never happen but on paper would be a really good conference and could get a solid TV deal. Whatever happens I hope it goes quickly.

If the Ducks leave, the Pac 12 is done; at least as a power conference. There will be some merger, but USU needs to pray Utah leaves, otherwise USU will be on the outside looking in and we'll be in a similar spot as the early 00's where if we are in a conference it won't be a good one. It will be some leftover late 90's big west type. We really need Utah to join the Big 12 already.

So glad we decided to roll with a lame duck president and an interim AD for the last calendar year. That was obviously always a great idea.

3rdGenAggie wrote: ↑

July 30th, 2023, 8:01 am

So glad we decided to roll with a lame duck president and an interim AD for the last calendar year. That was obviously always a great idea.

Blake Anderson was asked about this in one of his recent interviews around media days. Apparently he was part of this I believe it was ark state and it didn’t take nearly as long.

And couldn’t agree more third. It’s never good to have a lame duck anything for an extended period of time. I remember starting a thread on this in March and people getting all upset about it.

slcagg wrote: ↑

July 30th, 2023, 8:53 am

3rdGenAggie wrote: ↑

July 30th, 2023, 8:01 am

So glad we decided to roll with a lame duck president and an interim AD for the last calendar year. That was obviously always a great idea.

Blake Anderson was asked about this in one of his recent interviews around media days. Apparently he was part of this I believe it was ark state and it didn’t take nearly as long.

And couldn’t agree more third. It’s never good to have a lame duck anything for an extended period of time. I remember starting a thread on this in March and people getting all upset about it.

I'm a firm believer that sitting back and hoping everything turns out OK, with our fingers crossed, is a pretty poor business strategy. But, it's been our policy for quite sometime. If USU ends up in a dismall position, it will ALL be on USU.