Cost of rebuilding PAC-12 probably untenable

NowhereLandAggie · Post by **NowhereLandAggie** » January 9th, 2024, 8:51 pm

Details on the agreement. It sounds like OSU and WSU can't easily pilfer MW schools.

https://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/2024 ... -fees.html

3rdGenAggie · Post by **3rdGenAggie** » January 9th, 2024, 9:04 pm

Which is why the PAC 2 will wait to see what happens with the ACC and will probably end up in a full MWC merger eventually.

SLB · Post by **SLB** » January 9th, 2024, 9:10 pm

This is why a merger makes sense.

Donman · Post by **Donman** » January 9th, 2024, 9:24 pm

So the Commissioner did her job

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

USU78 · Post by **USU78** » January 9th, 2024, 9:46 pm

They've got nowhere else to go.

Bullnamed_gus · Post by **Bullnamed_gus** » January 9th, 2024, 9:49 pm

3rdGenAggie wrote: ↑
January 9th, 2024, 9:04 pm
Which is why the PAC 2 will wait to see what happens with the ACC and will probably end up in a full MWC merger eventually.

The more I see it, the more I think the more I think this is why we haven’t had a merger, and at the end of the day a merger is what’ll happen. I think they’re hoping that at least 2 schools. (Florida state and others) leave the ACC, and the ACC backfills with them creating a west coast division with the PAC 4, SDSU and SMu or something. That won’t happen. And if the ACC dissolves, Stanford and Cal aren’t going to trip with the PAC 2. They’d rather be independent or go to the Big 12.

Bullnamed_gus · Post by **Bullnamed_gus** » January 9th, 2024, 9:56 pm

Another Nugget, I don’t have the contract to me, but it appears to me to make it so the vote to dissolve and then 9 go over to the PAC 12, is not an option anymore. Well it is but it’ll still cost a lot of money. which defeats the purpose of voting to dissolve.

no one with a brain is going to pay 16 million to join the PAC 2, let alone 50.

I’m Surprised Boise and SDSU got on board.

WAAggie · Post by **WAAggie** » January 9th, 2024, 10:10 pm

Donman wrote:So the Commissioner did her job

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Sounds like it. Guess some negative Nancy's could've been wrong.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

2004AG · Post by **2004AG** » January 9th, 2024, 10:16 pm

Donman wrote:So the Commissioner did her job

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

I’d hold off on that victory lap.

This could still go 20 different ways.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ustate98 · Post by **ustate98** » January 10th, 2024, 6:45 am

I still don't understand why the PAC2 would want to play basketball in the WCC when they could have had a scheduling agreement with the MWC as well, along with the olympic sports.

ViAggie · Post by **ViAggie** » January 10th, 2024, 8:44 am

Bullnamed_gus wrote: ↑
January 9th, 2024, 9:56 pm
Another Nugget, I don’t have the contract to me, but it appears to me to make it so the vote to dissolve and then 9 go over to the PAC 12, is not an option anymore. Well it is but it’ll still cost a lot of money. which defeats the purpose of voting to dissolve.

no one with a brain is going to pay 16 million to join the PAC 2, let alone 50.

I’m Surprised Boise and SDSU got on board.

The PAC2 has no leverage unless they are offering to share their exit fee bounty from the PAC 10... and we all know that's not happening.

ratofallaggies · Post by **ratofallaggies** » January 10th, 2024, 8:53 am

ViAggie wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 8:44 am

Bullnamed_gus wrote: ↑
January 9th, 2024, 9:56 pm
Another Nugget, I don’t have the contract to me, but it appears to me to make it so the vote to dissolve and then 9 go over to the PAC 12, is not an option anymore. Well it is but it’ll still cost a lot of money. which defeats the purpose of voting to dissolve.

no one with a brain is going to pay 16 million to join the PAC 2, let alone 50.

I’m Surprised Boise and SDSU got on board.
The PAC2 has no leverage unless they are offering to share their exit fee bounty from the PAC 10... and we all know that's not happening.

Wait until next year when the scheduling agreement in football is up and they still have one more year left in the WCC for basketball.... It's not going to look good for them when they lose to a lot of MW teams in football for the 2024 season and then don't have anywhere to turn for the 2025 season.

gomretat · Post by **gomretat** » January 10th, 2024, 9:47 am

ustate98 wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 6:45 am
I still don't understand why the PAC2 would want to play basketball in the WCC when they could have had a scheduling agreement with the MWC as well, along with the olympic sports.

I have only heard one thing that makes sense and it was during an interview with Sabau before our bowl game. She alluded to the fact that if the PAC2 joined us in football and basketball that it could be legally argued that they were really part of the MWC and they might have to forfeit any PAC2 benefits that they were still fighting for. It sounds like that is what reversed the basketball agreement.

Aggiealum13 · Post by **Aggiealum13** » January 10th, 2024, 10:19 am

3rdGenAggie wrote: ↑
January 9th, 2024, 9:04 pm
Which is why the PAC 2 will wait to see what happens with the ACC and will probably end up in a full MWC merger eventually.

This is indeed what I was thinking too. Oregon State and Washington State will view the landscape for a year to see if the ACC's top teams crumble away and they get a spot there. I believe they want to keep the PAC 12 money for themselves, and not have to spend trying to rebuild a conference that's just going to end up being a G5 conference anyways.

ViAggie · Post by **ViAggie** » January 10th, 2024, 10:19 am

Reading the agreement, I'm with some of you who are in disbelief that SDSU and Boise went along with this. This even includes Hawaii! Crazy to think since they are only a FB partner in the MWC. But it certainly makes sense for a two-year scheduling deal. After that though... one has to wonder.

flying_scotsman2.0 · Post by **flying_scotsman2.0** » January 10th, 2024, 10:36 am

Why would any ACC teams want WSU or OSU? A western branch of a watered-down ACC of WSU, OSU, SDSU, and say Fresno or Vegas doesn’t seem like it would move the needle enough to justify cross-country trips. Now a 16-18 team super conference with western and eastern branches might make sense… keep travel costs low and still maybe maintain the autobid to the playoff. Like a Big12 lite. That is the only logical thing, and unfortunately it might be a very bad thing for USU. I still think it’s unlikely though.

Aggiealum13 · Post by **Aggiealum13** » January 10th, 2024, 10:55 am

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 10:36 am
Why would any ACC teams want WSU or OSU? A western branch of a watered-down ACC of WSU, OSU, SDSU, and say Fresno or Vegas doesn’t seem like it would move the needle enough to justify cross-country trips. Now a 16-18 team super conference with western and eastern branches might make sense… keep travel costs low and still maybe maintain the autobid to the playoff. Like a Big12 lite. That is the only logical thing, and unfortunately it might be a very bad thing for USU. I still think it’s unlikely though.

You're right they probably don't want them, for now. However, if ACC is on life support because teams like Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and North Carolina leave then things they didn't consider before will be considered such as Washington State and Oregon State. I do think that Washington State and Oregon State are probably looking into the Big 12 as well.

The notion that they're going to use the PAC 12 money to rebuild a conference would be like putting lipstick on a pig. The pig still being a G5 conference.

ratofallaggies · Post by **ratofallaggies** » January 10th, 2024, 11:00 am

Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 10:55 am

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 10:36 am
Why would any ACC teams want WSU or OSU? A western branch of a watered-down ACC of WSU, OSU, SDSU, and say Fresno or Vegas doesn’t seem like it would move the needle enough to justify cross-country trips. Now a 16-18 team super conference with western and eastern branches might make sense… keep travel costs low and still maybe maintain the autobid to the playoff. Like a Big12 lite. That is the only logical thing, and unfortunately it might be a very bad thing for USU. I still think it’s unlikely though.
You're right they probably don't want them, for now. However, if ACC is on life support because teams like Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and North Carolina leave then things they didn't consider before will be considered such as Washington State and Oregon State. I do think that Washington State and Oregon State are probably looking into the Big 12 as well.

If/when the ACC needs wsu and osu to save them.... they're done already. The Big12 will come in and take what they want from the ACC leftovers. I'm sure osu and wsu are looking into the Big 12, they have been for quite some time now, but that door is closed. Big 12 isn't going to throw them a lifeline. This is going to be a slow death for wsu and osu.

Post by **GeoAg** » January 10th, 2024, 11:59 am

So are the exit fees of 17 and 34 million depending on the notification lead time still in place as well?

ratofallaggies · Post by **ratofallaggies** » January 10th, 2024, 12:17 pm

GeoAg wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 11:59 am
So are the exit fees of 17 and 34 million depending on the notification lead time still in place as well?

Yes

ViAggie · Post by **ViAggie** » January 10th, 2024, 12:18 pm

ratofallaggies wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 11:00 am

Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 10:55 am

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 10:36 am
Why would any ACC teams want WSU or OSU? A western branch of a watered-down ACC of WSU, OSU, SDSU, and say Fresno or Vegas doesn’t seem like it would move the needle enough to justify cross-country trips. Now a 16-18 team super conference with western and eastern branches might make sense… keep travel costs low and still maybe maintain the autobid to the playoff. Like a Big12 lite. That is the only logical thing, and unfortunately it might be a very bad thing for USU. I still think it’s unlikely though.
You're right they probably don't want them, for now. However, if ACC is on life support because teams like Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and North Carolina leave then things they didn't consider before will be considered such as Washington State and Oregon State. I do think that Washington State and Oregon State are probably looking into the Big 12 as well.
If/when the ACC needs wsu and osu to save them.... they're done already. The Big12 will come in and take what they want from the ACC leftovers. I'm sure osu and wsu are looking into the Big 12, they have been for quite some time now, but that door is closed. Big 12 isn't going to throw them a lifeline. This is going to be a slow death for wsu and osu.

This is all leading to a Power 2 Structure. Forget the P5 or even the P4. Utah and ybu have to know this wont last long for them, I can't see either being invited to the SEC-AA.

Post by **Aglicious** » January 10th, 2024, 12:30 pm

I glad to see the waiving of all fees only pertains to a scenario of all MWC teams joining. Any lesser combination of schools, even the minimum 6 needed is just too high of a fee for the PAC2 to come up with. They are not sitting on some treasure chest of PAC money, what there is left will end up being distributed fairly among all 12. Perhaps the PAC2 end up getting a little more than the 10 departing schools but it won't be enough to pay fees for 6 new MWC teams.

This agreement basically leaves one option for the PAC2 to keep the PAC alive and that is a full merger with the MWC under that banner. I agree the basketball agreement with the WCC was a carefully thought out ploy to make it appear as though there is a hardship and no landing place for all their sports in one conference.

Post by **GeoAg** » January 10th, 2024, 2:38 pm

ratofallaggies wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 12:17 pm

GeoAg wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 11:59 am
So are the exit fees of 17 and 34 million depending on the notification lead time still in place as well?
Yes

Sweet, that means that besides the cost mentioned in the article...for the PAC2, the teams leaving still need to pay 17-34 mill in addition. No way that makes financial sense.

ineptimusprime · Post by **ineptimusprime** » January 10th, 2024, 9:45 pm

My takeaway from this — one of you more entrepreneurial people should start printing the USU PAC-12 car decals and T-shirts to get out in front of the merger.

But really, it’s over and done unless OSU and WSU somehow get invited to a P5 conference in the next year or two. This contract is a memorialization of that. That’s what this contract is.

StanfordAggie · Post by **StanfordAggie** » January 11th, 2024, 2:23 am

gomretat wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 9:47 am

ustate98 wrote: ↑
January 10th, 2024, 6:45 am
I still don't understand why the PAC2 would want to play basketball in the WCC when they could have had a scheduling agreement with the MWC as well, along with the olympic sports.
I have only heard one thing that makes sense and it was during an interview with Sabau before our bowl game. She alluded to the fact that if the PAC2 joined us in football and basketball that it could be legally argued that they were really part of the MWC and they might have to forfeit any PAC2 benefits that they were still fighting for. It sounds like that is what reversed the basketball agreement.

The other possibility is that the MWC simply drove a hard bargain and WSU/OSU said "no." And if that's what happened, I'm fine with it. The MWC's NET ranking is only slightly below the ACC's NET ranking. If anything, WSU and OSU would lower it, particularly once they no longer have a conference to recruit to. If OSU and WSU want to play in the MWC, let them pay for the privilege of lowering our NET. If they don't want to pay, then they can enjoy the high schools gyms of the WCC.

NavyBlueAggie · Post by **NavyBlueAggie** » January 18th, 2024, 10:49 pm

Bullnamed_gus wrote: ↑
January 9th, 2024, 9:56 pm
Another Nugget, I don’t have the contract to me, but it appears to me to make it so the vote to dissolve and then 9 go over to the PAC 12, is not an option anymore. Well it is but it’ll still cost a lot of money. which defeats the purpose of voting to dissolve.

no one with a brain is going to pay 16 million to join the PAC 2, let alone 50.

I’m Surprised Boise and SDSU got on board.
[/quote

To your point GUS, where else could SDSU and BS You actually go? Seems there will be a bunch more jousting before the PAC 2 land a steady conference gig.

Bullnamed_gus · Post by **Bullnamed_gus** » January 19th, 2024, 10:18 am

NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑
January 18th, 2024, 10:49 pm

Bullnamed_gus wrote: ↑
January 9th, 2024, 9:56 pm
Another Nugget, I don’t have the contract to me, but it appears to me to make it so the vote to dissolve and then 9 go over to the PAC 12, is not an option anymore. Well it is but it’ll still cost a lot of money. which defeats the purpose of voting to dissolve.

no one with a brain is going to pay 16 million to join the PAC 2, let alone 50.

I’m Surprised Boise and SDSU got on board.
[/quote

To your point GUS, where else could SDSU and BS You actually go? Seems there will be a bunch more jousting before the PAC 2 land a steady conference gig.
I’m mainly surprised they agreed to the penalties for poaching. It’s the wet dream of those two schools, maybe add in CSU, to separate from the mwc.

Upcoming Events

Event Results