|
|
Post by bucktoothvarmit on Oct 3, 2023 16:25:57 GMT -8
But the P5 conferences split the CFP money correct? And the Pac12 has an autonomous standing as a P5 conference in the NCAA correct? And the CFP can't expel any conference without a unanimous vote correct? And WSU's president is the Pac's representative on the CFP board correct? Seems to me that the Pac2 will share equally in CFP money for two years if they stay intact. CFP has zero to do with P5 identification. And the CFP $ is an agreement with the P5 on how to split ESPN $ (mostly), that can't be altered. The CFP can change to 12 team playoff format anyway they want. I guess my point is the CFP's money will be split among the P5 conferences and they have no mechanism to exclude the Pac2 for at least two years |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Oct 3, 2023 16:27:52 GMT -8
Do we think OSU is getting a lot of national attention? For football? For realignment/Pac12's demise? Our 4-1 record is a blip on the radar without all this fuss. I don't think there are rules regarding how you receive national attention. I mean, look at Colorado. Of course OSU and WSU are getting attention primarily because of realignment, etc. That both teams have done well so far just adds to it. And If one or both teams continue to win, that national attention won't go away. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Oct 3, 2023 16:33:21 GMT -8
Oh, and a bonus tidbit from that podcast... they think merging with the MWC is OSU's best chance of a golden ticket to the playoffs. Not joining another P4 conference. Well, they're wrong. Staying the Pac-2 would give them the best chance of a golden ticket to the CFP. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Oct 3, 2023 16:36:28 GMT -8
If the playoffs take the six highest ranked conference champions, then a Pac2 typically doesn't get an entrant. If you look at the last 20 years, as a guess, four times OSU or WSU would have qualified. If the estimate is $300m per conference, I think some of that is contingent on actually being in the playoffs. And finally life is not fair. The selection committee is a B10/ SEC ol boys club. Unless the selection method goes back to computers, the Beav/Coug coalition will have to knock the mierda out of teams to be invited.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaver55to7 on Oct 3, 2023 16:36:54 GMT -8
Well, isn't the top six ranked conference champions qualify as automatic qualifiers? Yes, and if nothing is changed voting-wise, that's how it stands for now. So yes, if OSU and WSU were to move ahead as the Pac-2, the champion of the conference would go to the CFP and bring in a big payday. And with Shulz as one of the voting members and the vote requiring a unanimous outcome, it definitely seems to be the case. No No No. There are currently 10 conferences, 5 p5 and 5 g5. Currently using the 6/6 model the top ranked 6 conference champions get a bid. So if the sec,acc,b1g, big 12, MWC, and AAC champion are higher ranked then the pac12 champ then they all get bids and the pac12 champion would have to pray for an at large bid. NO AUTOMATIC QUALIFIERS. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 3, 2023 16:41:52 GMT -8
Oh, and a bonus tidbit from that podcast... they think merging with the MWC is OSU's best chance of a golden ticket to the playoffs. Not joining another P4 conference. Well, they're wrong. Staying the Pac-2 would give them the best chance of a golden ticket to the CFP. Not if the playoff committee figures out a workaround for the "unanimous vote" in the next 15 months. Their point is the MWC is already among the strongest of the G5 Conferences right now, and is the only G5 conference with a ranked team currently, and the addition of OSU and WSU makes it stronger. OSU is set up to dominate that conference and would have a very good shot at being the highest ranked G5 conference team under either a 5/7 or 6/6 scenario... better than if a Big 12 member. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 3, 2023 16:47:19 GMT -8
Yes, and if nothing is changed voting-wise, that's how it stands for now. So yes, if OSU and WSU were to move ahead as the Pac-2, the champion of the conference would go to the CFP and bring in a big payday. And with Shulz as one of the voting members and the vote requiring a unanimous outcome, it definitely seems to be the case. No No No. There are currently 10 conferences, 5 p5 and 5 g5. Currently using the 6/6 model the top ranked 6 conference champions get a bid. So if the sec,acc,b1g, big 12, MWC, and AAC champion are higher ranked then the pac12 champ then they all get bids and the pac12 champion would have to pray for an at large bid. NO AUTOMATIC QUALIFIERS. Correct. If OSU & WSU are the "PAC 2" next year, there's no guarantee they are even going to be able to schedule 12 games, much less against strong enough teams to get quality wins and a high enough ranking to be one of the top 5-6 ranked "conference champions ". |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Oct 3, 2023 17:25:52 GMT -8
No No No. There are currently 10 conferences, 5 p5 and 5 g5. Currently using the 6/6 model the top ranked 6 conference champions get a bid. So if the sec,acc,b1g, big 12, MWC, and AAC champion are higher ranked then the pac12 champ then they all get bids and the pac12 champion would have to pray for an at large bid. NO AUTOMATIC QUALIFIERS. Correct. If OSU & WSU are the "PAC 2" next year, there's no guarantee they are even going to be able to schedule 12 games, much less against strong enough teams to get quality wins and a high enough ranking to be one of the top 5-6 ranked "conference champions ". Yeah, I stand corrected as far as the Pac-2 champion would need to be ranked high enough to get in. Edit: Yeah, it looks like merging with the MWC would probably be easier. But those rules are subject to change pretty quickly as well. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 3, 2023 17:45:26 GMT -8
Correct. If OSU & WSU are the "PAC 2" next year, there's no guarantee they are even going to be able to schedule 12 games, much less against strong enough teams to get quality wins and a high enough ranking to be one of the top 5-6 ranked "conference champions ". Yeah, I stand corrected as far as the Pac-2 champion would need to be ranked high enough to get in. I'm still not sure I would agree that it's not the best way to get in. Yeah, you would have to schedule and then play and win enough relevant games to get ranked high enough. If Wilky is right about potentially getting a chunk of the ex-Pac teams on the schedule, it might not be as difficult as you think. But playing a schedule that is deemed strong enough is a built-in problem with going the MWC route. It won't be any more of a built in problem than for any other G5 league. Remember, currently there is only 1 ranked G5 team, and that is Fresno. I'm kind of assuming the P4 Conferences are going to have 4 of the highest 5-6 ranked champions. A 5/7 format would allow for just 1 G5 conference champ (unless there are other G5 schools in the Top 12), a 6/6 format would allow for 2. The wildcard is Notre Dame, if Notre Dame is ranked at #15 by whatever standard the CFP Committee uses and the top G5 ranked school is #16 or lower and the Committee decides Notre Dame somehow should get a "conference" spot... a 6/6 format really helps the G5 schools. If Notre Dame can only qualify if it is in the Top 12, under a 6/6 format that potentially opens 2 G5 spots (or more if the P5 conferences are really bad). |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Oct 3, 2023 21:12:33 GMT -8
Yeah, I stand corrected as far as the Pac-2 champion would need to be ranked high enough to get in. I'm still not sure I would agree that it's not the best way to get in. Yeah, you would have to schedule and then play and win enough relevant games to get ranked high enough. If Wilky is right about potentially getting a chunk of the ex-Pac teams on the schedule, it might not be as difficult as you think. But playing a schedule that is deemed strong enough is a built-in problem with going the MWC route. It won't be any more of a built in problem than for any other G5 league. Remember, currently there is only 1 ranked G5 team, and that is Fresno. I'm kind of assuming the P4 Conferences are going to have 4 of the highest 5-6 ranked champions. A 5/7 format would allow for just 1 G5 conference champ (unless there are other G5 schools in the Top 12), a 6/6 format would allow for 2. The wildcard is Notre Dame, if Notre Dame is ranked at #15 by whatever standard the CFP Committee uses and the top G5 ranked school is #16 or lower and the Committee decides Notre Dame somehow should get a "conference" spot... a 6/6 format really helps the G5 schools. If Notre Dame can only qualify if it is in the Top 12, under a 6/6 format that potentially opens 2 G5 spots (or more if the P5 conferences are really bad). Yeah, I must not have gotten done editing my OP before you posted. I began wavering on the issue so I just deleted most of it and agreed on the MWC. As far as the 5/7 vs 6/6 format, I think they intend to stick with the 6/6 for two years. I do think it's going to be changed at some point and most likely as soon as possible after those two years. Also, you seem to be making the assumption that the Pac-MWC would not be a power conference (IMO that kind of defeats the purpose of creating it in many ways). Not sure what the Pac-2 would be or what ramifications the distinction would really have as far as the CFP. I assume not much. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 3, 2023 21:58:43 GMT -8
It won't be any more of a built in problem than for any other G5 league. Remember, currently there is only 1 ranked G5 team, and that is Fresno. I'm kind of assuming the P4 Conferences are going to have 4 of the highest 5-6 ranked champions. A 5/7 format would allow for just 1 G5 conference champ (unless there are other G5 schools in the Top 12), a 6/6 format would allow for 2. The wildcard is Notre Dame, if Notre Dame is ranked at #15 by whatever standard the CFP Committee uses and the top G5 ranked school is #16 or lower and the Committee decides Notre Dame somehow should get a "conference" spot... a 6/6 format really helps the G5 schools. If Notre Dame can only qualify if it is in the Top 12, under a 6/6 format that potentially opens 2 G5 spots (or more if the P5 conferences are really bad). Yeah, I must not have gotten done editing my OP before you posted. I began wavering on the issue so I just deleted most of it and agreed on the MWC. As far as the 5/7 vs 6/6 format, I think they intend to stick with the 6/6 for two years. I do think it's going to be changed at some point and most likely as soon as possible after those two years. Also, you seem to be making the assumption that the Pac-MWC would not be a power conference (IMO that kind of defeats the purpose of creating it in many ways). Not sure what the Pac-2 would be or what ramifications the distinction would really have as far as the CFP. I assume not much. I actually think a rebuilt PAC has a great shot at remaining a P5 conference and have said that a few times. In this scenario I went with the premise of just being the Pac 2 for two years. Reasons I consider it possible to retain P5 status if absorbing the MWC is: 1) The MWC is one of the strongest of the G5 conferences most seasons. 2) After merging, it likely would be the 5th strongest conference overall. 3)Assuming it happened after this year, there's that 2 year grace period where the Pac wouldn't be demoted, and the league could actually bring in a couple/few strong new teams in addition to get to 16/18 teams, many from large market cities. 4)The NCAA is going to have a tough time kicking the largest conference west of the Mississippi out of P5 status, leaving only the eastern US with "Power" conferences. It would destroy regionality, I'm not sure that would be thought of as a smart thing. I think in the end, we could eventually see a 16 team playoff. In theory, starting next season there could be a team or teams playing 4 playoff games. They might as well make it so there's no bye week for anyone, and to get to the finals all teams need to play 3 games to get there. At which point it could be a 6/10 or 7/9 format. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Oct 3, 2023 23:22:33 GMT -8
1) The MWC is one of the strongest of the G5 conferences most seasons.
That may be true, but it is nowhere near the level of the power 5 conferences.
2) After merging, it likely would be the 5th strongest conference overall.
Probably. And it would be nowhere near the level of the power 4.
3)Assuming it happened after this year, there's that 2 year grace period where the Pac wouldn't be demoted, and the league could actually bring in a couple/few strong new teams in addition to get to 16/18 teams, many from large market cities.
Or OSU and WSU could go Pac-2 and build from there if they don't get into the Big 12. Bring in Boise State, San Diego State and a few others from the MWC and then go for schools like Memphis and Tulane. Maybe the ACC sheds a few schools that could be added eventually. West-east divisions. Get the best possible schools/programs possible. A big TV or even streaming deal is pretty unlikely if it's just OSU, WSU and the MWC.
4)The NCAA is going to have a tough time kicking the largest conference west of the Mississippi out of P5 status, leaving only the eastern US with "Power" conferences. It would destroy regionality, I'm not sure that would be thought of as a smart thing.
TV and the power conferences will make the decisions. The NCAA is a joke. It will submit to its masters.
I think in the end, we could eventually see a 16 team playoff. In theory, starting next season there could be a team or teams playing 4 playoff games. They might as well make it so there's no bye week for anyone, and to get to the finals all teams need to play 3 games to get there.
At which point it could be a 6/10 or 7/9 format.
From what I've read, there is very little interest in expanding from 12 teams, at least for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 4, 2023 0:00:03 GMT -8
1) The MWC is one of the strongest of the G5 conferences most seasons. That may be true, but it is nowhere near the level of the power 5 conferences. 2) After merging, it likely would be the 5th strongest conference overall. Probably. And it would be nowhere near the level of the power 4. 3)Assuming it happened after this year, there's that 2 year grace period where the Pac wouldn't be demoted, and the league could actually bring in a couple/few strong new teams in addition to get to 16/18 teams, many from large market cities. Or OSU and WSU could go Pac-2 and build from there if they don't get into the Big 12. Bring in Boise State, San Diego State and a few others from the MWC and then go for schools like Memphis and Tulane. Maybe the ACC sheds a few schools that could be added eventually. West-east divisions. Get the best possible schools/programs possible. A big TV or even streaming deal is pretty unlikely if it's just OSU, WSU and the MWC. 4)The NCAA is going to have a tough time kicking the largest conference west of the Mississippi out of P5 status, leaving only the eastern US with "Power" conferences. It would destroy regionality, I'm not sure that would be thought of as a smart thing. TV and the power conferences will make the decisions. The NCAA is a joke. It will submit to its masters. I think in the end, we could eventually see a 16 team playoff. In theory, starting next season there could be a team or teams playing 4 playoff games. They might as well make it so there's no bye week for anyone, and to get to the finals all teams need to play 3 games to get there. At which point it could be a 6/10 or 7/9 format. From what I've read, there is very little interest in expanding from 12 teams, at least for the foreseeable future. Your response to number 3 is something I've thought is possible. As for a couple others where you bring up it'd be a weaker conference than the other 4 conferences, you are leaving out any room for improvement. The Pac 12 has had down years, the Big 12 has had bad years. I do not expect a newly reformed Pac to be gangbusters day one. The MWC schools have been living on 3-4 million buck media deals, this merger is not going to likely produce that kind of deal. There should be more money to work with, and it could be significantly more money than some here think, not 30 million a team, but not as low as some numbers I've seen thrown out there for a media deal. Add to that, they'll likely see more conference money outside the media deal than they currently see (they may get a share of that 360 payout we've been talking about). If these teams suddenly have an extra 8-10 million + each to invest in their programs they should probably improve. If Apple is in play and they offer a similar type contract (and I'm talking for significantly less than what was offered to the Pac a couple months ago) with the subscription bonus 50/50 split Apple offered gets reached, numbers could be significantly higher. You're selling the new conference short. Also, if TV still survives the next several years, it's going to want western audiences and more western based content than the few teams that left can provide. I'm really hoping Apple is still in play. Streaming could be a complete game changer over the next few years. With the subscription splits there really is no readily defined top limit on earnings, it could be very competitive with a couple of the P4 deals. This new conference is likely Apple’s last chance to get in the college game in any meaningful fashion for a number of years. I suspect the Pac schools that didn’t want that deal really blew it by turning it down. |
|
|
|
Post by justheretoread on Oct 4, 2023 6:18:49 GMT -8
I think the one thing most people on this thread are overlooking is the propensity for greed. The SEC and B1G do not want another power conference. Nor do they want G5 schools becoming more competitive and potentially taking a spot (s) from their members. They will stack the deck against this happening. You will have an occasional G5 team pop up here and there, but personally I can’t see much more than that. The trend (and their interest) is to fewer teams competing for the pot of gold, not more…
|
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Oct 4, 2023 6:48:42 GMT -8
365 sports on PAC 2 to Big 12.
Not happening
|
|
