• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Conference Re-Alignments

joncarl

Nobody important
10 Year Member
Can we ever get this successful?

Funny, I think it was BTN or ESPN not sure was talking about Alabama getting nervous and they brought up St. Thomas. Obviously it was in jest but still. I think the argument the conference made was that St. Thomas was twice the size that any other team in the conference was, if that is the argument they want to make, fine, but leave getting slapped around out of the argument.

And to your question. Wouldn't that be nice to be too successful.
 

David3464

Red Shirt
2 Year Member
I would just love to see the B12 implode and have Texas be stuck in the PAC12. Heck, even having them and Okie stuck in the PAC12 would be awesome. It would knock both those schools down a peg in viewership since so many schools there play late games. That, and their travel would almost guarantee some upset losses having to play in Pacific coast and NW USA. I just want all the B12 to suffer after how they treated the Huskers, A&M, Tigers,and Buffs...especially the Huskers though.
 
I would just love to see the B12 implode and have Texas be stuck in the PAC12. Heck, even having them and Okie stuck in the PAC12 would be awesome. It would knock both those schools down a peg in viewership since so many schools there play late games. That, and their travel would almost guarantee some upset losses having to play in Pacific coast and NW USA. I just want all the B12 to suffer after how they treated the Huskers, A&M, Tigers,and Buffs...especially the Huskers though.
I think that it's likely that Texas will eventually join the PAC because--apart from the name--it's a pretty good fit for all sides. I'm not as confident that that would hurt their future either. If the PAC could add both Texas and Oklahoma, that would be their ideal scenario. It would probably not only save that conference financially, it would make that conference a force to be reckoned with.

There's an East Coast bias to the idea that nobody watches the PAC 12 because of the time differences. The same argument can be made in the other direction. The bigger problem for the PAC is the general apathy of the region towards football as compared to the Southeast, Midwest, and southern Great Plains. When/if they were to marry all of those top-level football recruits in California with those in Texas and add in the prestige of teams like Texas and Oklahoma (if they joined, too), it would be a force to be reckoned with. They're not going to care about what the East Coast thinks or watches because they'll be their own self-sustaining force of nature, and whoever would win the PAC would likely be getting into the playoffs.

At this point, the PAC needs Texas a lot more than Texas needs them, and it's going to grow more in that direction. The PAC has a lot of similar academic standards to the B1G and wants to go a lot farther in that direction, so Texas is a good fit for that. Oklahoma is not. Oklahoma's history, culture, etc., most clearly place it in the SEC. I could see that happening. Texas and Texas A&M together to the PAC would have made a lot of sense in 2010.
 

TnHusker87

Recruit
I think that it's likely that Texas will eventually join the PAC because--apart from the name--it's a pretty good fit for all sides. I'm not as confident that that would hurt their future either. If the PAC could add both Texas and Oklahoma, that would be their ideal scenario. It would probably not only save that conference financially, it would make that conference a force to be reckoned with.

There's an East Coast bias to the idea that nobody watches the PAC 12 because of the time differences. The same argument can be made in the other direction. The bigger problem for the PAC is the general apathy of the region towards football as compared to the Southeast, Midwest, and southern Great Plains. When/if they were to marry all of those top-level football recruits in California with those in Texas and add in the prestige of teams like Texas and Oklahoma (if they joined, too), it would be a force to be reckoned with. They're not going to care about what the East Coast thinks or watches because they'll be their own self-sustaining force of nature, and whoever would win the PAC would likely be getting into the playoffs.

At this point, the PAC needs Texas a lot more than Texas needs them, and it's going to grow more in that direction. The PAC has a lot of similar academic standards to the B1G and wants to go a lot farther in that direction, so Texas is a good fit for that. Oklahoma is not. Oklahoma's history, culture, etc., most clearly place it in the SEC. I could see that happening. Texas and Texas A&M together to the PAC would have made a lot of sense in 2010.
I think Austin would likely fit in well with a lot of the west coast cities too.
 

Huskerthom

All Legend
5 Year Member
I think that it's likely that Texas will eventually join the PAC because--apart from the name--it's a pretty good fit for all sides. I'm not as confident that that would hurt their future either. If the PAC could add both Texas and Oklahoma, that would be their ideal scenario. It would probably not only save that conference financially, it would make that conference a force to be reckoned with.

There's an East Coast bias to the idea that nobody watches the PAC 12 because of the time differences. The same argument can be made in the other direction. The bigger problem for the PAC is the general apathy of the region towards football as compared to the Southeast, Midwest, and southern Great Plains. When/if they were to marry all of those top-level football recruits in California with those in Texas and add in the prestige of teams like Texas and Oklahoma (if they joined, too), it would be a force to be reckoned with. They're not going to care about what the East Coast thinks or watches because they'll be their own self-sustaining force of nature, and whoever would win the PAC would likely be getting into the playoffs.

At this point, the PAC needs Texas a lot more than Texas needs them, and it's going to grow more in that direction. The PAC has a lot of similar academic standards to the B1G and wants to go a lot farther in that direction, so Texas is a good fit for that. Oklahoma is not. Oklahoma's history, culture, etc., most clearly place it in the SEC. I could see that happening. Texas and Texas A&M together to the PAC would have made a lot of sense in 2010.
Really have to disagree with you. Rankings money and everything else is tied to who and how many are watching. B1G, SEC, ACC all have games at (est) noon, 4, and 7/8 PM Latest games end at ~11-11:30 PM. All the decision makers can watch those games live and not miss a beat. Whereas the PAC is 4, 7/8 and 11pm starts. No one from the east coast is watching games that end at 2 am. That will not change because of adding two teams. That will always give them a disadvantage in voting for rankings. Look at 2003. USC should have been in the NC game.

Also although there is a large population base in the west. There is very little support for football. Greater Los Angeles area has almost 10 times the population of the state of NE. They have 2 major NCAA teams. So even if you divide that in half. That gives you a population base each of 5 times greater than NE. Yet SC averages 18000 less than we do and UCLA averages 23000 less than we do. To make it even worse. Most people in San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernadino counties are also fans of one of these two schools. Probably a few other counties north as well. Although I never lived or worked their.

Add to this. Although UT is a very liberal school their fans are not, Okie definitely is not. Severe Culture clash there.
 
Really have to disagree with you. Rankings money and everything else is tied to who and how many are watching. B1G, SEC, ACC all have games at (est) noon, 4, and 7/8 PM Latest games end at ~11-11:30 PM. All the decision makers can watch those games live and not miss a beat. Whereas the PAC is 4, 7/8 and 11pm starts. No one from the east coast is watching games that end at 2 am. That will not change because of adding two teams. That will always give them a disadvantage in voting for rankings. Look at 2003. USC should have been in the NC game.

Also although there is a large population base in the west. There is very little support for football. Greater Los Angeles area has almost 10 times the population of the state of NE. They have 2 major NCAA teams. So even if you divide that in half. That gives you a population base each of 5 times greater than NE. Yet SC averages 18000 less than we do and UCLA averages 23000 less than we do. To make it even worse. Most people in San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernadino counties are also fans of one of these two schools. Probably a few other counties north as well. Although I never lived or worked their.

Add to this. Although UT is a very liberal school their fans are not, Okie definitely is not. Severe Culture clash there.
You say that you disagree with me, and then you made a lot of the same observations and arguments that I've made. USC should have been in the '03 game? I agree, but USC hadn't been good for so long that they didn't get the credit that they would have received a few years later. Did people STILL not watch or notice USC in '04, '05, and so on? Were they not on TVs on the East Coast? Those time slots can be looked at in a lot of different ways, but the bottom line is that fans will watch a good team, regardless of when it's on, and it takes good players to make good teams. Being in Pacific time probably hurts the Washington State-type teams, but that's also why adding a Texas would make so much sense for them.

As for those late-night time slots, Oregon built a national reputation by playing late on Saturday nights. They didn't have the drawing power of a USC, but there are still an unbelievable number of people now in their 20s who were watching them back then and still have a soft spot for them now.

Back to TV fans and USC, do you suppose that it would have affected TV ratings and dollar revenues if USC had been better over the past decade? They are the marquee team in that league, and they have a national fan base that rivals almost any other program not named "Notre Dame." Between scholarship restrictions and probation, USC's slide was bad for the whole conference. Stanford and Oregon were able to emerge during that vacuum, but neither draws the kind of fan base that USC has.

Neither of us is going to convince the other, but I stand by my original point: If you are hoping that Texas and Oklahoma are punished by being forced to go to the PAC, you need to be aware that you're likely to one day be sad to see that you got what you wished for.
 

TnHusker87

Recruit
How do you see OU fitting in with the SEC?
Never been to Norman, Oklahoma so I really cannot judge their fit with another conference.

Austin is a city that I experienced during the middle ‘90s while stationed at Ft Hood — even took in a game at that UT against Colorado. That city was clearly a liberal, progressive town back then that evoked my previous comment & opinion that it might be a good fit with the PAC12.
 
Let's see. History of cheating check, put football above the welfare of their players, check. Yeah I think it would be a match.
Sadly, that's not really anything facetious. Add in that (to phrase it mildly) they don't have the best academic reputation either. I always thought that the Sooners-SEC zinger war was more of a love/hate thing than anything else.

With all that said, OU is still my favorite villain. There's no other team that I've more enjoyed beating.
 

Cisco

Recruit
2 Year Member
With regards to the late start times, if Texas and another partner were to join the Pac 12, they would have the option of flipping the divisions from N-S to E-W. Six of seven of the new East would be either Central or Mountain time zone. One team on West Coast would get screwed in that scenario though. Another option would be no divisions. Either way, the late start times would be far from an every week deal.
 

WestTexasHusker

Travel Squad
5 Year Member
Texas will end up in the B1G, because that's where the money is and the B1G will gladly have them. OU will follow, of course. Patience. The Grant of Rights in the Big 12 goes a few more years yet.

I'm not sure where that leaves the other schools in the Big 12, but the two king pins will be going to the B1G, with a fresh new, $2 billion media deal for the B1G 16 to spread around.

Everyone else in the country will be picking up the crumbs.

Count on it.
 

MadRat

Recruit
2 Year Member
Is there a problem with popularity of football in California or is it about the high cost to attend games?
 
Top