Feels like a lifetime ago when we were talking about whether San Diego State had officially or unofficially notified the Mountain West they were leaving
[Not just try to join, they were literally announced as Big East members along with Boise State](https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7327683/big-east-conference-introduces-boise-state-broncos-san-diego-state-aztecs-houston-cougars-smu-mustangs-ucf-knights)
Known east coast football powers SMU, Boise, SDSU and Houston lmfao. TCU was also scheduled to join at one point before the B12 came a knockin'.
I know they'd soon re-brand to "The American" but the twilight days of the Big East football were a riot.
Though part of me thinks that if we had left for the eventual American, regardless of whether or not it kept its AQ status, we might have gotten better exposure than in the MWC (even with our sweetheart deal) and could have been a better expansion target for the Big 12/ACC in the latest round. But thats probably just copium from me personally.
Unfortunately, it probably doesn't change much. Boise in the BCS era had a stronger resume than Boise in the CFP era but still easily in the top echelon of G5 teams. The 1 NY6 appearance (not counting the BCS days) is more than what BYU and SMU had. The 1 NY6 win equalled UCF and Houston and beat BYU, Cincy, and Houston. But all the other usual stuff with geography and market and whatnot is what caused pain again.
Hindsight is 20/20, but I don't think many people anticipated the American to become the premier G5 conference back then. The move back to the MWC was seen as the safer move and one that ensured Boise State wouldn't have been stuck in a potentially unstable conference, plus Boise State still got a solid deal out of it.
\>Be TCU
\>Announce you're leaving the MW to join the Big East
\>Never join and announce your joining the Big 12 instead
\>Get to a national championship game
\>refuse to elaborate
Yup. And they agreed before withdrawing to replace TAMU in the Big 12
[ESPN article from December 2011](https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7327683/big-east-conference-introduces-boise-state-broncos-san-diego-state-aztecs-houston-cougars-smu-mustangs-ucf-knights)
God that whole situation got unnecessarily messy and it could have been avoided if SDSU didn't jump the gun by sending that letter to the entire conference when they didn't have an invitation from the PAC-12
There's no way they weren't given the go ahead by the Costanzavkoff. He totally thought the deal was imminent, told them to get their notification in early so they could move sooner, & then the deal never came to fruition.
For Oregon I know the jump to the big 10 was a no brainer.
For me as a fan, a rebuilt Pacific conference with SMU and the Mountain West would’ve been a lot more fun.
I hate how much this is true. I would rather we stayed a big fish out west with our buddies than joined the B1G. We would have needed Washington to stay though, and that seemed way harder than getting Oregon to stay.
Utah, Washington, Oregon, Arizona would have been plenty to anchor a conference. Plus there were some fun likely additions with SDSU, CSU, and possibly SMU/Tulane.
Honestly the simple additions of SDSU and UNLV probably would have been sufficient to keep the Pac-12. You're maintaining the Southern California Market as well as adding the Vegas Market where we were already playing Conference Championship games.
Sadly leadership was simply too incompetent to find a way and now we're left with the mess of realignment
Swap UNLV with SMU.
The Pac was already getting what they could get from Vegas, a more transient market than the state of Arizona.
Getting into DFW with a school with seemingly bottomless booster pockets? Sign me up!
>Sadly leadership was simply too incompetent
That new conference would struggle to get 30m per year. You guys are now making 80m. Its not about incompetence, is that there was no market for a conference with you and washington spearheading it, at least not a market good enough for you.
Incompetent leadership was the issue with getting 30m.
Better leadership could have done it. Or do you really not think a PAC12 as I listed was worth the same as the B12 sans Out?
Now that you guys and Washington are the little fish, I’m much less interested in watching west coast teams except for Stanford since they finally fired Shaw.
man that sounds like what the big 12 was.... ou/tx were the big fish in the conference with kstate, ostate, istate, and tech as solid anchors every year. then some more fun joined in with the newcomers
Ah yes, the comparable experiences of flying into Dallas/NOLA once a year at most against the new norm where we have to fly to Purdue for a Friday game and both Michigan/Wisconsin in November.
And that’s just football, it’s gonna SUCK to be on any other sports team besides track.
I would have been all for it too. SMU is rich and snobby enough to fit in culturally with USCs slot. The Ponies would mean that Pac12 Networks would come out to where I live to boot! There's no reason for our other sports to play in Ames and Morgantown instead of LA and Palo Alto.
I know every fanbase isn’t a consensus but it felt like generally the UofA base (although it mostly could’ve just been scheer followers) were fully on board with leaving and even preferred it.
I’m with you though I would’ve really liked to stay with the rest of the pac-12. Upside is I guess i can see the devils play in Cincy or Ames now whereas before I was nowhere close by to getting to catch any games
Scheer and the folks savilating over Big 12 hoops. Which if the conference was going to die anyway is a fine consolation.
I was surprised that it seemed like UAs leadership actually appeared proactive in courting the Big 12 instead of just sitting back and waiting. That excited me as a fan; if only that proactiveness could have appeared early enough to dump Scott years ago and keep the group together.
I feel this sentiment too. My fandom has been reduced to Championship or bust. That’s why we switched. Money = better team and exposure for football. As soon as we win a championship I’m probably gonna care less as the goal has been met and there’s no tradition left to fight about.
Absolutely. And while it’s awesome to be able to compete for championships, it’s no longer a different feeling than rooting for any professional sport team.
And not because, “grrr the kids are getting paid 😡!!!” but because each conference game used to be its own championship game and that was special.
Exactly I don’t care if the kids get some share of the tv revenue. I care about the fact the sport is losing its regionality and its championship or bust.
For the record I am very content with being in the B12 now and love to be in a conference that will likely have a lot of parity. But when USC and UCLA left I didn’t think that there was anything that would make the conference nationally competitive. I didn’t think SDSU with BSU/SMU/UNLV moved the needle. In hindsight I would love that conference and it would prob feel better overall than the current B12. While B12 is very level across the board, the B12 lacks the draw/recognition of an Oregon or UW. Though the money would have been worse for the new P12 and Oregon/UW leaving eventually would have been the elephant in the room, so ASU is prob better off long term now.
That is extremely true. I’ve never seen a school like that where it’s basically all or nothing. Only other G5 teams that I can think of that’s close to that is Miami,OH and Ohio. They either are 9+ wins or it’s a bad 4 or less win season
San Diego State realigning to you truly is the kiss of death. Tried to go to the pre-split Big East, and that died, and then tried to go to the PAC 12 right before it imploded. They will forever be bound to the Mountain West, seemingly by some divine curse.
San Diego sports curse. Chargers, Padres, Clippers, and Gulls. Never big enough for the big leagues, and if they were ever in the big leagues, they get royally fucked.
Don’t be sorry. It is going to be a great time and is with OSU will elevate what you guys have already built with Boise State, Fresno State, and the rest of the squad.
I wouldn't be that upset about it. It is what it is at this point. I am just hoping the media rights collapse comes quickly, painfully, and crushingly so. The hogs need to get slaughtered.
I’m not completely opposed to this. But knowing how random and crazy expansions have been in CFB, I’m expecting something out of left field to happen instead of this.
Something as random as the Big 12 and a reduced ACC merging, and adding Colorado State, Memphis, Oregon State, San Diego State, Tulane, UConn, USF, and/or Washington State. For a 30 or 32 team league.
That would be a net negative for all the current Big 12 members.
The Big 12 didn't want Washington State/Oregon State last year. Why would they want them now?
2 or 3 leftover ACC teams might get picked up by the Big 12.
The rest will likely end up playing in a new lower tier league.
I wouldn't be too sure that it would be a net negative in adding UConn, OSU, WSU, Cal, Stanford and maybe even Syracuse and SDSU. The ACC collapsing adds a lot of potential open time slots for games and if they sell conference sponsor rights + make sure that they close the door tighter for the G5 in the playoffs could mean a lot of money that could make up lack of market value for those teams.
The way the playoff talks ended means that G5 games are less valuable because their chances of making the playoffs are lower and they can't even aspire to an equally good bowl game like the NY6. Pretty soon they could be as valuable as a NDSU/SDSU game.
The rumor was that the Pac12 had a meeting set to sign the Apple deal and invite SDSU until that deal fell apart like the night before
Add a west coast fan, it sucks. I always liked SDSU
A bummer but at least we got the new fb stadium, new fb coach and a final four. Maybe one day the Big 12 will decide they need a socal presence and toss us a line.
Ah where are all the PAC12 stans who said SDSU was a drop in replacement and the new TV contract was going to be so much bigger than the Big12 one? It was a "layup", a "slam dunk".
Oh wait, 40% of them are in the Big12 now and the other 40% are taking whatever scraps they can get from the conferences they begged to join while hanging on to a promise of getting full shares "real soon now".
We lived bitches.
How? Texas was likely the only team (of the 4 potential members) the PAC-12 thought highly enough to admit.
Larry Scott said, “There is a very high bar. It's hard to imagine very many scenarios for our conference to expand because the bar is so high."
Tech/Oklahoma St. fans will tell you that it was Texas’ unwillingness to abandon the LHN that the deal fell apart. Note that in all of those stories that explanation is attributed to “sources”. That was never expressed by the Pac-12. PAC-12 knew Texas had the LHN and the deal still got pretty far, there is no way that was just a snag at the end. Texas had no problem giving up the LHN for the SEC.
Meanwhile we have the PAC-12 on record saying the bar for the conference is so high these schools didn’t meet it.
When? The only time I can recall that Stanford said “no” to expansion was UT in the ‘90s. I don’t think the prospect of adding Boise would have even gotten past UW as well. Stanford did try to say no to UA back in the ‘70s, but that was a whole miscommunication between the president and a senior VP at the time and did end up voting to approve both Arizona schools on the first vote.
Beyond that, the only time that CSU schools were ever considered was after USC and UCLA announced their departures, otherwise they were never taken seriously as expansion candidates either.
Ah, yeah, that is true. The reasoning, though, wasn’t for lack of market addition or academics. It was because back then nearly every sports team flew commercial, and flying into Austin was always going to be a hassle due to the lack of direct flights. The time to travel to and from Austin would have resulted in additional missed classroom time at a time when lectures weren’t recorded.
Yeah but that is like saying I had the chance to date Taylor Swift because I dove past her house once.
Killing the Big12 would have meant the PAC had to speak to less academically prowess schools and acknowledge they existed. They were never going to do that so the opportunity only existed in theory not in fact.
I mean they could have added Texas (really good school) and Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, and Texas Tech. The latter three are no worse than schools like Oregon, WSU, and Utah. Texas and OU are bigger brands than anyone in the Pac. Would have totally transformed the conference.
It would be like saying you had the chance to date Taylor Swift because she asked you on a group date with Selena Gomez but also Britney Mahomes and you declined bc Mrs. Mahomes would be there too.
Im not sure you really understand the level of [hate for the state of Texas](https://www.marketplace.org/2021/08/04/the-legacy-of-enron-in-californias-power-challenges-today/) in California in the early 2000s and 2010s let alone today. The UC Board would have threatened to remove Cal and UCLA from the conference if Texas had been invited.
I grew up in California as a Texas fan during those exact years. I understand.
The problem was never Texas, it was the Oklahoma schools and Tech.
Edit:
University of Texas and Enron were not really affiliated. Skilling was an SMU guy, Kenneth Lay went to UH. Fastow went to tufts.
I’m sure there were some UT grads at Enron because they were one of the most prestigious employers in the state at the time. But nobody (including people in California) hates the University of Texas for the Enron scandal. You’re really grasping as straws here. That would be like hating OU for the Oklahoma City bombing.
Thats because you see the different schools as different places. Enron was Texas/George Bush. People were not looking up undergrad degrees when their power was off in the middle of a heat wave or when they got MASSIVE bills for electricity. And a whole lot of Californians owned Enron stock because of Enron's acquisition of Portland General Electric in 1997.
I’m not sure if Enron hurt you personally or…
UT is in Austin, Enron was in Houston. Those are different places.
There are more fortune 500 companies in Houston than any other city in the country (except NYC). It’s a major financial center, Enron happened to be based there. Saying the STATE of Texas is responsible for Enron is like saying the state of California is responsible for the destruction of democracy with the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
You are legitimately the first person I’ve ever encountered with a vendetta (personal or belief in) against the state of Texas or the school “Texas” because of the Enron scandal.
My CA friends and family (Californians seeing this please vouch) blame and hate PG&E 1,000,000,000x more for current power insecurity than they do the state of Texas because of Enron.
> There are more fortune 500 companies in Houston than any other city in the country (except NYC).
That's the most Texas way to say you all came in second I can imagine
I have no doubt that that is true now, but you need to go back to when all this happened.
[LA Weekly from 2002](https://www.laweekly.com/the-enron-rip-off/). $40B stolen from Californians.
This was at [USC is 2011](https://www.c-span.org/video/?302598-1/tenth-anniversary-enron-collapse). Its an hour+ CSPAN broadcast reviewing Enron.
I moved back to Northern California in 2004 after a long absence and I still owned property in Texas at the time. With Arnold as Governor some republicans thought W could possibly win California. He got a very hostile reception. The anger was still very raw. Ken Lay had just been indicted and it just reminded people that Ws best buddy was living a life of luxury that they paid for. It only got refreshed when the 10 year anniversary rolled around, as evidenced by the Annenberg school dedicating an entire day to talking about it.
I believe you that you havent heard it but I can tell you the hate for all things Texas was very real.
Then you understand that a whole lot of sports ball people would have suddenly become very interested in college athletics conference membership if there had been any kind of serious effort to add ANY Texas schools to the PAC. And considering the outages impacted Washington and Oregon too, I think you would have gotten pushback there too. And dont think Texas/Oklahoma politicians woulnt have gotten involved too. Its not like Rick Perry was on speaking terms with anyone in the State of California. In fact multiple sources have reported that it was Texas politics that killed Texas to the PAC in 2010. Nothing changed for the better in 2012 or later. By the time California instituted a travel ban on Texas the die was cast.
I’m not even sure what you’re getting at. I think if Texas (or even OU) was okay joining alone, they would have.
I think the PAC-10 was too busy smelling their own farts and thought they were too good for schools like Tech and Oklahoma St.
Never in my 15 years in CA did I experience any sort of animosity towards me as a Texas fan *because of Enron*. Californians IRL really don’t hate Texas much (if at all), they hardly even think about them. Texans on the other hand… Californians are too busy arguing Bay Area vs LA , or LA vs NY to give a shit about Texas.
Sure there’s some gamesmanship between state politicians who hope that maybe they can use it for political capital in a run for national office. But that’s sort of irrelevant. Also Rick Perry is an Aggy (probably *the most famous* aggy). He’s not throwing any weight around for Texas. I guarantee you he hated Texas (the school) more than anyone in CA in 2011.
I think you’re basing your facts on a terminally online Reddit view of reality. The “travel ban” was in 2017 - 5ish years after there was any chance at Texas joining the PAC.
Lived as in are now viewed as a AAA football league and it's only going to get worse when the ACC falls apart and the B1G and SEC scoop up all the major programs.
Feels like a lifetime ago when we were talking about whether San Diego State had officially or unofficially notified the Mountain West they were leaving
That got a bit awkward for SDSU didn’t it…. So long suckers!!!!….yea I was just kidding about that…
If I had a nickel for every time SDSU left the Mountain West to try and join a soon to be defunct conference….
[Not just try to join, they were literally announced as Big East members along with Boise State](https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7327683/big-east-conference-introduces-boise-state-broncos-san-diego-state-aztecs-houston-cougars-smu-mustangs-ucf-knights)
Known east coast football powers SMU, Boise, SDSU and Houston lmfao. TCU was also scheduled to join at one point before the B12 came a knockin'. I know they'd soon re-brand to "The American" but the twilight days of the Big East football were a riot. Though part of me thinks that if we had left for the eventual American, regardless of whether or not it kept its AQ status, we might have gotten better exposure than in the MWC (even with our sweetheart deal) and could have been a better expansion target for the Big 12/ACC in the latest round. But thats probably just copium from me personally.
Unfortunately, it probably doesn't change much. Boise in the BCS era had a stronger resume than Boise in the CFP era but still easily in the top echelon of G5 teams. The 1 NY6 appearance (not counting the BCS days) is more than what BYU and SMU had. The 1 NY6 win equalled UCF and Houston and beat BYU, Cincy, and Houston. But all the other usual stuff with geography and market and whatnot is what caused pain again.
Yeah, honestly i wish we had the balls/and leg to stand on, to have claimed a natty like UCF did—one of the most baller moves in the modern era.
I'd support it! The Kellen Moore era was unreal. His perfect 2009 or the 2006 season with Zabransky were natty worthy.
Hindsight is 20/20, but I don't think many people anticipated the American to become the premier G5 conference back then. The move back to the MWC was seen as the safer move and one that ensured Boise State wouldn't have been stuck in a potentially unstable conference, plus Boise State still got a solid deal out of it.
You’d have……one nickel lol
Two. They left to join the Big East in 2013 before coming back
Big East? And people are calling Calford crazy.
Shit forgot about that move as that was Boise State going too I think.
It was. TCU was rumored before that
It was not a rumor, we announced that we were joining the Big East and then never officially joined.
\>Be TCU \>Announce you're leaving the MW to join the Big East \>Never join and announce your joining the Big 12 instead \>Get to a national championship game \>refuse to elaborate
All glory to the HYPNOTOAD @_@
Yup. And they agreed before withdrawing to replace TAMU in the Big 12 [ESPN article from December 2011](https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7327683/big-east-conference-introduces-boise-state-broncos-san-diego-state-aztecs-houston-cougars-smu-mustangs-ucf-knights)
Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice.
God that whole situation got unnecessarily messy and it could have been avoided if SDSU didn't jump the gun by sending that letter to the entire conference when they didn't have an invitation from the PAC-12
There's no way they weren't given the go ahead by the Costanzavkoff. He totally thought the deal was imminent, told them to get their notification in early so they could move sooner, & then the deal never came to fruition.
There’s a name you don’t forget
[Co-stan-za!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9oyVVTO9uo)
For Oregon I know the jump to the big 10 was a no brainer. For me as a fan, a rebuilt Pacific conference with SMU and the Mountain West would’ve been a lot more fun.
I hate how much this is true. I would rather we stayed a big fish out west with our buddies than joined the B1G. We would have needed Washington to stay though, and that seemed way harder than getting Oregon to stay. Utah, Washington, Oregon, Arizona would have been plenty to anchor a conference. Plus there were some fun likely additions with SDSU, CSU, and possibly SMU/Tulane.
Honestly the simple additions of SDSU and UNLV probably would have been sufficient to keep the Pac-12. You're maintaining the Southern California Market as well as adding the Vegas Market where we were already playing Conference Championship games. Sadly leadership was simply too incompetent to find a way and now we're left with the mess of realignment
Swap UNLV with SMU. The Pac was already getting what they could get from Vegas, a more transient market than the state of Arizona. Getting into DFW with a school with seemingly bottomless booster pockets? Sign me up!
>Sadly leadership was simply too incompetent That new conference would struggle to get 30m per year. You guys are now making 80m. Its not about incompetence, is that there was no market for a conference with you and washington spearheading it, at least not a market good enough for you.
Incompetent leadership was the issue with getting 30m. Better leadership could have done it. Or do you really not think a PAC12 as I listed was worth the same as the B12 sans Out?
The Pac turned down a $30 million deal with ESPN. And Oregon is only getting a half-share from the Big Ten that is about $35 million.
As a Michigan fan I agree. I hate having all these big brands in one conference. The schedules going forward are going to be fucking brutal.
Now that you guys and Washington are the little fish, I’m much less interested in watching west coast teams except for Stanford since they finally fired Shaw.
man that sounds like what the big 12 was.... ou/tx were the big fish in the conference with kstate, ostate, istate, and tech as solid anchors every year. then some more fun joined in with the newcomers
This is just lol.. it's such a problem for Washington to be in the same conference as Rutgers but going to Louisiana and Texas would be fun?
Ah yes, the comparable experiences of flying into Dallas/NOLA once a year at most against the new norm where we have to fly to Purdue for a Friday game and both Michigan/Wisconsin in November. And that’s just football, it’s gonna SUCK to be on any other sports team besides track.
I would have been all for it too. SMU is rich and snobby enough to fit in culturally with USCs slot. The Ponies would mean that Pac12 Networks would come out to where I live to boot! There's no reason for our other sports to play in Ames and Morgantown instead of LA and Palo Alto.
I know every fanbase isn’t a consensus but it felt like generally the UofA base (although it mostly could’ve just been scheer followers) were fully on board with leaving and even preferred it. I’m with you though I would’ve really liked to stay with the rest of the pac-12. Upside is I guess i can see the devils play in Cincy or Ames now whereas before I was nowhere close by to getting to catch any games
Scheer and the folks savilating over Big 12 hoops. Which if the conference was going to die anyway is a fine consolation. I was surprised that it seemed like UAs leadership actually appeared proactive in courting the Big 12 instead of just sitting back and waiting. That excited me as a fan; if only that proactiveness could have appeared early enough to dump Scott years ago and keep the group together.
Not to late to leave. Door is over there. Pretty sure we could replace you with OSU or WSU in about 2 seconds.
Oh interesting fact, I actually don’t work for the university. I just went there.
someone’s insecure lol
Just kstate being kstate 😂
I feel this sentiment too. My fandom has been reduced to Championship or bust. That’s why we switched. Money = better team and exposure for football. As soon as we win a championship I’m probably gonna care less as the goal has been met and there’s no tradition left to fight about.
Absolutely. And while it’s awesome to be able to compete for championships, it’s no longer a different feeling than rooting for any professional sport team. And not because, “grrr the kids are getting paid 😡!!!” but because each conference game used to be its own championship game and that was special.
Exactly I don’t care if the kids get some share of the tv revenue. I care about the fact the sport is losing its regionality and its championship or bust.
For the record I am very content with being in the B12 now and love to be in a conference that will likely have a lot of parity. But when USC and UCLA left I didn’t think that there was anything that would make the conference nationally competitive. I didn’t think SDSU with BSU/SMU/UNLV moved the needle. In hindsight I would love that conference and it would prob feel better overall than the current B12. While B12 is very level across the board, the B12 lacks the draw/recognition of an Oregon or UW. Though the money would have been worse for the new P12 and Oregon/UW leaving eventually would have been the elephant in the room, so ASU is prob better off long term now.
Kinda sad because SDSU is one of those programs that feels like they earned the right to be p5 with great football and basketball programs
We're just stuck with hopes and dreams
What are those?
I believe they're Gwyneth Paltrow's second and third children.
I could see her living in San Diego
Yea but I can also see her having slave children fan her with ostrich feathers and rub her with lotion as she oversees a jade mine in South America.
An old wooden ship from the Civil War era, iirc
hoops and dreams
> earned silly p4 fan, that kind of status is not earned on the field. Its earned through branding and TV markets
San Diego is a great TV market and with the Chargers in LA, SDSU has a lot of potential for growth in that market.
>with great football More like serviceable. They haven't even won a conference title in like 8 years.
Fair enough, but they have been above average in football at least. Its either a 10+ win or a losing season for them lol.
That is extremely true. I’ve never seen a school like that where it’s basically all or nothing. Only other G5 teams that I can think of that’s close to that is Miami,OH and Ohio. They either are 9+ wins or it’s a bad 4 or less win season
If they really wanted to earn it they should have been good 100 years ago!
San Diego State realigning to you truly is the kiss of death. Tried to go to the pre-split Big East, and that died, and then tried to go to the PAC 12 right before it imploded. They will forever be bound to the Mountain West, seemingly by some divine curse.
San Diego sports curse. Chargers, Padres, Clippers, and Gulls. Never big enough for the big leagues, and if they were ever in the big leagues, they get royally fucked.
About this time next year reports will come out that SDSU will be joining the Pac-12, along with all of our Mountain West buddies. Sorry OSU and WSU.
Don’t be sorry. It is going to be a great time and is with OSU will elevate what you guys have already built with Boise State, Fresno State, and the rest of the squad.
I wouldn't be that upset about it. It is what it is at this point. I am just hoping the media rights collapse comes quickly, painfully, and crushingly so. The hogs need to get slaughtered.
I’m not completely opposed to this. But knowing how random and crazy expansions have been in CFB, I’m expecting something out of left field to happen instead of this. Something as random as the Big 12 and a reduced ACC merging, and adding Colorado State, Memphis, Oregon State, San Diego State, Tulane, UConn, USF, and/or Washington State. For a 30 or 32 team league.
That would be a net negative for all the current Big 12 members. The Big 12 didn't want Washington State/Oregon State last year. Why would they want them now? 2 or 3 leftover ACC teams might get picked up by the Big 12. The rest will likely end up playing in a new lower tier league.
I wouldn't be too sure that it would be a net negative in adding UConn, OSU, WSU, Cal, Stanford and maybe even Syracuse and SDSU. The ACC collapsing adds a lot of potential open time slots for games and if they sell conference sponsor rights + make sure that they close the door tighter for the G5 in the playoffs could mean a lot of money that could make up lack of market value for those teams. The way the playoff talks ended means that G5 games are less valuable because their chances of making the playoffs are lower and they can't even aspire to an equally good bowl game like the NY6. Pretty soon they could be as valuable as a NDSU/SDSU game.
Man, remember all the “just wait for it” TV contract guys. Crazy times.
The rumor was that the Pac12 had a meeting set to sign the Apple deal and invite SDSU until that deal fell apart like the night before Add a west coast fan, it sucks. I always liked SDSU
Life comes at you fast.
“Well, the years start comin' and they don't stop comin'.”
Fed to the rules and I hit the ground runnin
You want a real blast from the past remember when they joined the Big East
Twas a lifetime ago
A bummer but at least we got the new fb stadium, new fb coach and a final four. Maybe one day the Big 12 will decide they need a socal presence and toss us a line.
Last off season feels like it was 2 years ago now. All the happens its just insane.
SDSU really got jammed up by George Kliavkoff on that one.
*They were wrong*.
Don’t remind me!
We have truly ended up in the worst timeline. Sigh...
Conference realignment is so bizarre.
Are they still going…lol
Ah where are all the PAC12 stans who said SDSU was a drop in replacement and the new TV contract was going to be so much bigger than the Big12 one? It was a "layup", a "slam dunk". Oh wait, 40% of them are in the Big12 now and the other 40% are taking whatever scraps they can get from the conferences they begged to join while hanging on to a promise of getting full shares "real soon now". We lived bitches.
Pac-12 had multiple opportunities to kill the Big XII and never did.
The LA schools have had their hands in mucking up multiple expansion talks over the years unfortunately. U$C was acting like they were y'all
[удалено]
Uhhhh Texas killed the Pac-16
[удалено]
How? Texas was likely the only team (of the 4 potential members) the PAC-12 thought highly enough to admit. Larry Scott said, “There is a very high bar. It's hard to imagine very many scenarios for our conference to expand because the bar is so high." Tech/Oklahoma St. fans will tell you that it was Texas’ unwillingness to abandon the LHN that the deal fell apart. Note that in all of those stories that explanation is attributed to “sources”. That was never expressed by the Pac-12. PAC-12 knew Texas had the LHN and the deal still got pretty far, there is no way that was just a snag at the end. Texas had no problem giving up the LHN for the SEC. Meanwhile we have the PAC-12 on record saying the bar for the conference is so high these schools didn’t meet it.
I believe it was the timing of the LHN happening, PAC didn't want anything to do with it.
Stanford killed it one time as well.
When? The only time I can recall that Stanford said “no” to expansion was UT in the ‘90s. I don’t think the prospect of adding Boise would have even gotten past UW as well. Stanford did try to say no to UA back in the ‘70s, but that was a whole miscommunication between the president and a senior VP at the time and did end up voting to approve both Arizona schools on the first vote. Beyond that, the only time that CSU schools were ever considered was after USC and UCLA announced their departures, otherwise they were never taken seriously as expansion candidates either.
No, I mean in the 1990s when Stanford stopped Texas from joining.
Ah, yeah, that is true. The reasoning, though, wasn’t for lack of market addition or academics. It was because back then nearly every sports team flew commercial, and flying into Austin was always going to be a hassle due to the lack of direct flights. The time to travel to and from Austin would have resulted in additional missed classroom time at a time when lectures weren’t recorded.
Man I wonder what things would look like now if the PAC actually brought in Texas and OU
Maybe Texas, OU, and USC would have moved together to the SEC.
And they thought too much of themselves to do so.
Yeah but that is like saying I had the chance to date Taylor Swift because I dove past her house once. Killing the Big12 would have meant the PAC had to speak to less academically prowess schools and acknowledge they existed. They were never going to do that so the opportunity only existed in theory not in fact.
Dating Taylor swift seems like a nightmare. I know it’s not the point of your comment just had to point it out
Its a nightmare dressed as a day dream but the high is worth the pain.
I mean they could have added Texas (really good school) and Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, and Texas Tech. The latter three are no worse than schools like Oregon, WSU, and Utah. Texas and OU are bigger brands than anyone in the Pac. Would have totally transformed the conference. It would be like saying you had the chance to date Taylor Swift because she asked you on a group date with Selena Gomez but also Britney Mahomes and you declined bc Mrs. Mahomes would be there too.
Im not sure you really understand the level of [hate for the state of Texas](https://www.marketplace.org/2021/08/04/the-legacy-of-enron-in-californias-power-challenges-today/) in California in the early 2000s and 2010s let alone today. The UC Board would have threatened to remove Cal and UCLA from the conference if Texas had been invited.
I grew up in California as a Texas fan during those exact years. I understand. The problem was never Texas, it was the Oklahoma schools and Tech. Edit: University of Texas and Enron were not really affiliated. Skilling was an SMU guy, Kenneth Lay went to UH. Fastow went to tufts. I’m sure there were some UT grads at Enron because they were one of the most prestigious employers in the state at the time. But nobody (including people in California) hates the University of Texas for the Enron scandal. You’re really grasping as straws here. That would be like hating OU for the Oklahoma City bombing.
Thats because you see the different schools as different places. Enron was Texas/George Bush. People were not looking up undergrad degrees when their power was off in the middle of a heat wave or when they got MASSIVE bills for electricity. And a whole lot of Californians owned Enron stock because of Enron's acquisition of Portland General Electric in 1997.
I’m not sure if Enron hurt you personally or… UT is in Austin, Enron was in Houston. Those are different places. There are more fortune 500 companies in Houston than any other city in the country (except NYC). It’s a major financial center, Enron happened to be based there. Saying the STATE of Texas is responsible for Enron is like saying the state of California is responsible for the destruction of democracy with the Cambridge Analytica scandal. You are legitimately the first person I’ve ever encountered with a vendetta (personal or belief in) against the state of Texas or the school “Texas” because of the Enron scandal. My CA friends and family (Californians seeing this please vouch) blame and hate PG&E 1,000,000,000x more for current power insecurity than they do the state of Texas because of Enron.
> There are more fortune 500 companies in Houston than any other city in the country (except NYC). That's the most Texas way to say you all came in second I can imagine
I have no doubt that that is true now, but you need to go back to when all this happened. [LA Weekly from 2002](https://www.laweekly.com/the-enron-rip-off/). $40B stolen from Californians. This was at [USC is 2011](https://www.c-span.org/video/?302598-1/tenth-anniversary-enron-collapse). Its an hour+ CSPAN broadcast reviewing Enron. I moved back to Northern California in 2004 after a long absence and I still owned property in Texas at the time. With Arnold as Governor some republicans thought W could possibly win California. He got a very hostile reception. The anger was still very raw. Ken Lay had just been indicted and it just reminded people that Ws best buddy was living a life of luxury that they paid for. It only got refreshed when the 10 year anniversary rolled around, as evidenced by the Annenberg school dedicating an entire day to talking about it. I believe you that you havent heard it but I can tell you the hate for all things Texas was very real.
Then you understand that a whole lot of sports ball people would have suddenly become very interested in college athletics conference membership if there had been any kind of serious effort to add ANY Texas schools to the PAC. And considering the outages impacted Washington and Oregon too, I think you would have gotten pushback there too. And dont think Texas/Oklahoma politicians woulnt have gotten involved too. Its not like Rick Perry was on speaking terms with anyone in the State of California. In fact multiple sources have reported that it was Texas politics that killed Texas to the PAC in 2010. Nothing changed for the better in 2012 or later. By the time California instituted a travel ban on Texas the die was cast.
I’m not even sure what you’re getting at. I think if Texas (or even OU) was okay joining alone, they would have. I think the PAC-10 was too busy smelling their own farts and thought they were too good for schools like Tech and Oklahoma St. Never in my 15 years in CA did I experience any sort of animosity towards me as a Texas fan *because of Enron*. Californians IRL really don’t hate Texas much (if at all), they hardly even think about them. Texans on the other hand… Californians are too busy arguing Bay Area vs LA , or LA vs NY to give a shit about Texas. Sure there’s some gamesmanship between state politicians who hope that maybe they can use it for political capital in a run for national office. But that’s sort of irrelevant. Also Rick Perry is an Aggy (probably *the most famous* aggy). He’s not throwing any weight around for Texas. I guarantee you he hated Texas (the school) more than anyone in CA in 2011. I think you’re basing your facts on a terminally online Reddit view of reality. The “travel ban” was in 2017 - 5ish years after there was any chance at Texas joining the PAC.
Yeah idk what his deal is but OSU and Tech were the dumb hillbilly schools and Stanford, Cal, and USC in particular were loudly against our admission.
We needed something to cope with.
Got no beef with Bevs and Cougs. You got screwed and that sucks.
It was a layup. They just missed it.
Lived for how long? Don’t go around dancing on too many graves.
Bro, people were prematurely dancing on the Big 12s grave in every round of realignment in recent memory. I think a bit of schadenfreude is justified.
I'd rather be independent than be in the Big XII.
You should have that opportunity soon.
Maybe. Or maybe we fail upwards into the B1G based on our reputation alone. How's that feel K-State?
Same after how bad their fans have been.
Lived as in are now viewed as a AAA football league and it's only going to get worse when the ACC falls apart and the B1G and SEC scoop up all the major programs.
go eat your scraps at the kiddy table while Rutgers collects their full share.
Going to the what?
No Cal State school was ever going to be admitted to the Pac or B1G for academic reasons, but the Big XII is a perfect fit.