UCF_rustbucket

I don't think it would make enough money to make the cross country trip worthwhile for USF and UConn. It also seems likely that if the PAC 2 are stuck as demoted G5 teams, they will only rebuild with the full MWC. The scheduling agreement makes it expensive for the PAC 2 to add only some MWC teams instead of all of them. And so if they're forced to take all 12, that puts the new PAC at 14 which is plenty big. No need to expand further.

FSU to the Big 12 would be absolute nightmare scenario for them. They'd have egg on their face. A Big 12 with FSU and maybe some others could theoretically get more money than the current ACC, but it would still be so far behind the SEC/B1G. Which is the cause of all the hoopla making them unhappy in the ACC. So they'd have to really turn up the spin machine to sell that move as a victory. Can't see it happening.

I don't think that's correct. The most recent change they made was to require conferences to have at least 8 members in order for their conference champ to qualify for one of the 6 conference champ autobids and the 4 first round byes available only to conference champs. That was just to prevent the PAC 2 from trying to claim that the winner of their 2 team conference deserves one of those 6 spots. But the remaining 6 spots are at large and there is no rule favoring teams in conferences versus independents. Notre Dame was involved in the decision making to expand the CFP from 4 to 12 and supported it knowing that they would only qualify as an at large. They've made the 2 team BCS and 4 team CFP as an independent, they'll have no issue making the 12 team CFP as an independent. Their president is one of the 11 members of the CFP governance board and their AD is on the CFP management board alongside the 10 conference commissioners. ND is in every way treated like a P5 team except for access to the first round byes. https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sports/2019/4/3/governance.aspx

In a hypothetical relegation setup, both ways could be considered but football only seems easier. Especially if the relegation only includes current D1 teams and doesn't mix in D2 or 3. P5, G5, and FCS are football only things. For all the other sports D1 is D1. So if I were the king of the NCAA, those other sports would be in regional leagues.

While Swaim and some of the others like MHver3 definitely prop up the Big 12, that's not always the goal of their nonsense. It's mostly to get clicks and attention and make people think they're super special insiders with information on realignment when they've got message board connections at best.

Exactly. The big blue bloods won't sign up for it on the off chance that a few down years sends them out. The coat tail riders would absolutely find no value in this.

To me, it's the same as how the Old Big East/AAC was booted from the BCS club when it became the CFP/P5 era. The AAC 1.0 once the dust settled was CUSA plus 3.5 legacy Big East teams. The legacy members give the conference enough juice to put it above the other have nots, but the leftovers (especially just 2) of a P5 conference don't have the cache to lift 12 legacy MWC members into power status. It'll definitely be a solid conference. The West Coast counterpart to AAC 1.0.

They'll definitely make a strong case for best of the rest. But I can't see them being any more successful than Aresco and the P6 campaign in actually gaining power status.

I don't think it's in the greedy nature of any power conference to buy low. If Calford and SMU didn't have any new big markets to add to the ACCN, the ACC doesn't throw them a lifeline. They buy at the latest moment possible.

Houston is tricky for me. They have the market, the Big Bucks donor, historic ties to the legacy SWC teams, outstanding basketball program, and past success in football. But we're hitting almost a decade now of a rollercoaster in football. Meh fan support in football, but they also benefit from being driving distance to the core of the conference so an easy road game for opposing fans. Supposed dislike of their big donor by other Big 12 schools and not wanting another team encroaching on their recruiting territory. In some ways the best fit profile wise of all 4 teams added in the first wave but also polarizing among the legacy members.

They still had the QB situation though. If they're in the playoffs it's very possible that Tate Rodemaker doesn't transfer out like he did since he'd be the starter. But still, it would be more favorable to play a Tate Rodemaker (at best) led FSU team vs the Bo Nix Oregon team that clapped them. FSU's defense is vicious so I'd still pick FSU hands down, but without the same level of offense they're capable of with Travis it would give Liberty some glimmer of hope.

If this were the first year of the expanded playoffs, Liberty would have had a more favorable matchup against QB-less FSU. Round 1 is the 5-8 seeds hosting the 9-12 seeds. Would have had: 12 Liberty at 5 FSU 11 Ole Miss at 6 UGA 10 Penn State at 7 Ohio State 9 Mizzou at 8 Oregon

And you also wouldn't need to win all of them. You win Boise and 1 of the 2 other and you're good.

Was headed here to post this. We all knew they voted against the new members but man, didn't realize how mad they were about it. Saw another detailed post outlining the FSU mentions that other conferences raided the PAC and AAC yet the 3 teams the ACC added were left behind by the other conferences. Ouch.

Two different costs, but both negotiable. The $120M is just the conference exit fee. They'd have to pay an exit fee regardless of GOR. It's part of what members agree to. But this isn't what they're scared of, especially if they can negotiate it down a bit. It's the GOR penalties. There's no prescribed fee to pay. But realistically you'd need both your current rights holders and the one trying to buy them to be on the same page (assuming they're different, like if they went to the B1G and Fox instead of SEC/ESPN). That's how Oklahoma and Texas were able to leave the Big 12 a year early. Everyone involved was open to negotiation and the networks swapped some content to make everyone happy. FSU is trying to bypass the GOR negotiation though by just saying it shouldn't be legally bound to this. Which is probably the only way they can get out with a whole decade plus left on it, compared to UT/OU who could already see the light at the end.

Definitely not saviors. But realistic targets for the Big 12 to bolster the conference membership while weakening a competitor. There were extreme long shot dreams for Oregon or Washington but the 4 corners were the best fit geographically and actually attainable once the PAC was falling apart.

I agree on the reasons for it being an odd fit, but it wasn't UConn that killed it. The Big 12 did. Yormark was very much pushing for it because he's a NYC guy and wants to capitalize on the Big 12 branding itself as the best basketball conference, since football is impossible with the SEC and B1G miles ahead. But the Big 12 schools weren't as hot on the idea, for the same reasons you mentioned and historically bad football. Not just UConn but also the northeast in general. They were given serious consideration to be team #14 if only Colorado came over and the remaining 4 corners stayed to rebuild the PAC. But the dream scenario was always adding existing P5 teams from the PAC to further solidify the Big 12 within the P conferences. They got the 4 corners like they'd hoped so UConn wasn't needed anymore.

The AD lot lol but after hearing how you guys talk about your ADs, I'm starting to wonder if you didn't just pay some drunk UCF fan to do it

I'm curious on results on a poll. Specifically on structure vs game day environment. Because for a lot of these stadiums from traditional powers, they have a large capacity and great crowds. But they're older and not as nice. At least in the general seating areas. The fancy box suites I'm sure get frequent updates over the years.

I think people get confused and are used to sporting venues that are constructed in suburbs with a sea of parking lots right next to it. A stadium being built on a university campus can just reuse the lots and garages spread throughout campus. And you're right about the closer lots, that's how we do it. One right next to the stadium and the softball lot are premium. Then as you get further out it's cheaper. You even have free parking on the further end of campus if you don't mind the walk.

Adding shade structures is apparently stupid expensive. SDSU nixed the shade canopies they wanted because estimates were $50-$100M for just that. Don't know what it would've cost y'all because that quote I'm sure has a California price increase plus it can change depending the exact design of the shade structures.

That's all we need to acknowledge. MHver3 is out here trying to drum up like and retweets by pumping out spicy lies lol

Right. Even if it's only a couple, the alternative is being left behind.

The wording from the spokesperson definitely is a bit of PR fluff. Not saying it's the end of the world, far from that. But my guess is that for what USF wanted feature-wise, the contractor wouldn't be able to meet it price wise. So now back to looking at a few other bids to try and get more competitive cost estimates.

One squillion.