Reply With Quote
We all know Texas will be in the PAC-16 soon enough with Boise and the Oklahoma schools, tbh...
With a 4 team playoff being adopted you are probably right. Although the SEC just showed that they could get 2 teams in the playoff while still playing a championship game.
We all know Texas will be in the PAC-16 soon enough with Boise and the Oklahoma schools, tbh...
Why not? The SEC took Aggie after all, so anything is possible, tbh....
Football reasons aka recruiting
Look, I know your existence currently depends on vicarious victories of other SEC schools, but it can certainly needlessly complicate the playoff picture if one of the teams has a very bad day.
As for some ty team moving up because of a good championship game -- don't really see its happening.
The terms are making the most money. If Texas thinks it needs the socialistic distribution system of the SEC, it will adopt it.
Seeing as much money as they make now and during this contract period, I don't see anyone passing them up in the money department or their being able to make much more money elsewhere. They got pretty much everything they wanted and any playoff system is going to include a route in for them.Of course the whole conversation is purely academic until Texas has it's 1st & 2nd tier broadcast rights back because nobody's taking Texas without those. Along those lines, I'm curious how iron clad that grant of rights agreement really is. For the time being it certainly looks like Baylor, Iowa State, the Kansaii and others were successful in getting Texas to agree to handucuff itself to them, but I've got to believe that Texas has a key stashed away somewhere.......
Because they are Texas.
There's no way the Pac-12 is gonna add Boise. The last thing the Pac needs is another school that brings little to no additional TV markets and a school that sucks at basketball. If the Pac adds more schools they should be schools that help get Pac-12 basketball off of the life support its been on for 3 years now. That's why they wanna get OU without getting OSU.
By that logic, they should have added Rice instead.... similarly ty team, but they could get them Texas recruits AND look slightly better academically as a conference, tbh....Football reasons aka recruiting
That's why the Pac reportedly has had interest in Rice over much better athletic schools. It opens up recruiting in the Houston area and improves the conference academically.
The SEC obviously does not pride themselves on Academics.
Presumably, if/when the PAC expands to 16, the first invites will go out to TU, OU, and Okie Lite.... but then, there's not many reasonable options left to fill out that 16th spot, tbh....
I highly doubt they'd take the likes of Hawai'i, Fresno State, or SDSU, and BYU is off the table for any major conference for their stance against playing on Sundays... That leaves Boise State, who happens to be really good at THE biggest money-making sport in college athletics and already competes in the conference in wrestling, or some tier program that doesn't make sense geographically....
College football drives all realignment though, as it brings in most of the money... basketball will always be a secondary concern, and Texas and Okie Lite have historically decent hoops programs anyway...If the Pac adds more schools they should be schools that help get Pac-12 basketball off of the life support its been on for 3 years now.
Hey, Vandy needs SOME compe ion on the SEC quiz bowl circuit, tbh...The SEC obviously does not pride themselves on Academics.
Not when the average SEC fan looks like thisHey, Vandy needs SOME compe ion on the SEC quiz bowl circuit, tbh...
Agree on both.
Replace Boise with Tech and you've got a plausible scenario.
So let me get this straight: Boise State isn't plausible because of "academics," "bad basketball program" and "small market size," but Texas Tech - a non-AAU university in freaking Lubbock, Texas that sucks balls at both revenue sports - is somehow more plausible?
UT won't be going any where without lilbro.
, it might not go anywhere without Baylor.
The Pac doesn't want Okie lite. What held things up the last time a Pac-16 was being discussed was the fact we wanted OU without having to take OSU. This has been evident for awhile now.
wrestling
The day OU and UT go to the Pac is the day the Big-12 completely folds up or becomes a ty conference. One of two things would happen, politics would force the Pac to take Tech and OSU with OU and UT as the other two teams, or the Pac would have its choice of 2 schools from what would be a Big-12 ready to die. The Pac would take a school like Kansas way before it takes Boise State.
Money drives realignment and Boise State won't bring in any more money. It's not much of an added TV market at all and it doesn't open up any major recruiting pipelines.
There aren't any public officials that would force the Pac to take Boise State if they take UT, so yeah Tech is a lot more plausible. No one said the Pac wants Tech.
No. Boise State isn't plausible because they're in Boise. Tech is still in Texas, barely, and Texas/OU/Okstate would all rather have a 3rd rival in their geographic vicinity than only two plus one 1,000-something miles away.
Boise is the 112th-ranked market in America... Lubbock is ranked 143rd....
Lubbock = In Texas.
Boise = Not in Texas.
Schools who would prefer to play an extra game in Texas every other year as opposed to having to travel to Boise = Texas, OU, OK State.
Conferences who don't care one way or the other about Boise or Lubbock and would be content to let Texas pick who they want = Pac 12.
If Texas and the Oklahoma schools want to play in Lubbock so bad in that scenario, instead of scheduling another FCS cupcake, they could add Texas Tech to their OOC schedules....
So what faction of the Texas legislature would actively work for Boise State to join the PAC with UT?
Just trying to see how this would work out.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions