|
|
Post by angrybeaver67 on Oct 7, 2023 15:18:02 GMT -8
Drunk and Stupid - I hope you’re right. It’s along the lines of my thinking. (Or hoping???). And good to be reminded that the proposed new PAC as of today have 3 ranked teams vs. 1 from the new Big 12.
It would be great to be in a situation where we have an easier path to the playoffs than the Ducks… Imagine the Buyers Remorse among our Duck Friends… 😁 The thought definitely makes me smile.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparty on Oct 7, 2023 16:52:17 GMT -8
If OSU and WSU already tried to poach some teams from the MWC (which I'm not sure about, thought that was the then-Pac-10), then questions about why the Pac-2 would try to do so should be answered. It's basically the same reasons that the Big Ten poached USC, UCLA and then UW and UO. You want to add the best programs you can to build up a conference. In the Pac-2's case, it's to rebuild an entire conference. IMO, adding OSU and WSU to the MWC and renaming it the Pac-12 doesn't make it a rebuilt conference. It's just the MWC with OSU and WSU. And that's how the rest of the country will view it. It should only be an option (most likely the only option) if the Pac-2 do not win the legal battle. WRONG. Adding OSU and WSU to the MWC keeps the same media partner. They may renegotiate a bit, but I don't expect a huge change. It also keeps the MWC history. Doing a reverse merger keeps the Pac 8/10/12 history intact and sets off a whole new round of media partner possibilities, and between a new media partner and existing NCAA and Bowl obligations, there will be more money involved. There is HUGE value in the PAC brand compared to the MWC brand. In your mind it might just be the MWC with 2 new schools added, and there might be others who feel the same, but in reality whomever gets the media contract is going to push the "new and rebuilt" PAC on all their broadcasts and promos... and that will become the new reality over time. It may take a couple/few years, but in general the public's memories are relatively short. I clearly remember the Pac 8, there are some here who are old enough to remember the Pacific Coast Conference. Is today's Pac 12 just the Pacific Coast Conference with a few extra teams? I it just the Pac 10 with 2 extra teams? IF the new PAC Whatever retains P5 status, those memories will be very short. With every BSU/Fresno/SDSU/other former MWC team win or close game against a P4 team in OOC or Bowl play, the thought that it's not the PAC will erode. There's a difference. The old Pac-12 complained that the public opinion outside of pac-land was not that great. It was not looked on that great in SEC country and Big10 country before all of this so I don't think it will magically jump up on the radar with a new pac. The pac-12 had an image problem well before all of this happened. Maybe a new conference name would be in fact better. |
|
|
|
Post by whocares on Oct 7, 2023 17:13:02 GMT -8
Hard to improve your public image when the average east coast football fan is passed out on the couch from eight hours of drinking before the west coast games start.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Oct 7, 2023 17:34:35 GMT -8
WRONG. Adding OSU and WSU to the MWC keeps the same media partner. They may renegotiate a bit, but I don't expect a huge change. It also keeps the MWC history. Doing a reverse merger keeps the Pac 8/10/12 history intact and sets off a whole new round of media partner possibilities, and between a new media partner and existing NCAA and Bowl obligations, there will be more money involved. There is HUGE value in the PAC brand compared to the MWC brand. In your mind it might just be the MWC with 2 new schools added, and there might be others who feel the same, but in reality whomever gets the media contract is going to push the "new and rebuilt" PAC on all their broadcasts and promos... and that will become the new reality over time. It may take a couple/few years, but in general the public's memories are relatively short. I clearly remember the Pac 8, there are some here who are old enough to remember the Pacific Coast Conference. Is today's Pac 12 just the Pacific Coast Conference with a few extra teams? I it just the Pac 10 with 2 extra teams? IF the new PAC Whatever retains P5 status, those memories will be very short. With every BSU/Fresno/SDSU/other former MWC team win or close game against a P4 team in OOC or Bowl play, the thought that it's not the PAC will erode. There's a difference. The old Pac-12 complained that the public opinion outside of pac-land was not that great. It was not looked on that great in SEC country and Big10 country before all of this so I don't think it will magically jump up on the radar with a new pac. The pac-12 had an image problem well before all of this happened. Maybe a new conference name would be in fact better. I mean, I just don't see it. The MWC is a group of five conference. Adding OSU and WSU to it somehow makes it as good as or better than the Pac-12 in public opinion? Not to mention the opinion of the powers that be... I think they try to entrench the new Pac into group of five status as soon as it's possible and eventually try to narrow the group of five's chances at the CFP. That $320 million number isn't being thrown out for no reason. It's an estimate on how much the CFP payout will be once it expands to 12 teams. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 7, 2023 17:41:15 GMT -8
WRONG. Adding OSU and WSU to the MWC keeps the same media partner. They may renegotiate a bit, but I don't expect a huge change. It also keeps the MWC history. Doing a reverse merger keeps the Pac 8/10/12 history intact and sets off a whole new round of media partner possibilities, and between a new media partner and existing NCAA and Bowl obligations, there will be more money involved. There is HUGE value in the PAC brand compared to the MWC brand. In your mind it might just be the MWC with 2 new schools added, and there might be others who feel the same, but in reality whomever gets the media contract is going to push the "new and rebuilt" PAC on all their broadcasts and promos... and that will become the new reality over time. It may take a couple/few years, but in general the public's memories are relatively short. I clearly remember the Pac 8, there are some here who are old enough to remember the Pacific Coast Conference. Is today's Pac 12 just the Pacific Coast Conference with a few extra teams? I it just the Pac 10 with 2 extra teams? IF the new PAC Whatever retains P5 status, those memories will be very short. With every BSU/Fresno/SDSU/other former MWC team win or close game against a P4 team in OOC or Bowl play, the thought that it's not the PAC will erode. There's a difference. The old Pac-12 complained that the public opinion outside of pac-land was not that great. It was not looked on that great in SEC country and Big10 country before all of this so I don't think it will magically jump up on the radar with a new pac. The pac-12 had an image problem well before all of this happened. Maybe a new conference name would be in fact better. One thing is, this year and last were two very strong years. There will be those who set those 2 seasons as their baseline when judging how the "new" PAC Whatever does. Part of the reason the whole relegation concept came up is so the FBS remains at 11 conferences and there are 5 which are "stronger" to keep the status quo. It keeps 1 conference "powerful" while creating the ability for teams in the other to move up. It could be wrought with money issues for any team dropping down n but then again, that could encourage investment. The one thing it would do is potentially help create added interest/curiosity outside of the conference footprint. The thing I see is things will change, but it could be a good/interesting change. |
|
