HossAg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

HossAg said:

---

Tech makes more money for a conference than Baylor. If it came down to choosing Baylor or Tech, it would be Tech.

---

SEC has zero need for another school from Texas. None.

Nor do I see the wisdom in going to 18 teams. Sixteen is already too many and with the loss of divisions, choosing a conference champion is just a complicated crap shoot.

---

You gotta look at it differently. The SEC and Big 10 are going to become the new NCAA. They won't care if everyone plays everyone every year. They won't care about "conference champions". The new conference championship is gonna be the College Football Playoff with X amount of teams that's built for the participants of those 2 conferences. There could be like 48 teams between the two conferences to make that work. It may even result in a bunch of divisions within those conferences with way more structure than we had before with various conferences of various sizes. The point is, however it ends up, the conferences will be in control of everything. That's their end goal with all this consolidation.

---

From 64+ Notre Dame down to 48 member schools only? That leaves a lot of programs without a chair when the music stops. And then whoever is doing the scheduling within the conference would be picking the winners and losers for that season. Somebody gets a tough as nails schedule and others do not.

I just see more potential downside than upside with the coming chaos.

There's going to be a lot of teams left out. And college football has never had equality in scheduling. I imagine they'd end up with some sort of division structure where the division champs and a few wild cards make the playoffs. Idk how they'll do it, but there's basically no way to make it "fair" with the current lack of parity in the sport.

I doubt many CFB fans will view it as a net positive for the sport, although it will be entertaining for the teams that get included.

The death of the PAC means the Big 12 lives on by bringing in PAC leftovers.

Buck Turgidson said:

---

The death of the PAC means the Big 12 lives on by bringing in PAC leftovers.

---

Or vice versa. Big XII will never have a conference network.

PAC does. The PAC really screwed it up but they can get a media partner and have a do-over.

Big XII is worthless. Has been for a decade or more.

Big 12 is the driver's seat, not the PAC 12.

GoldenGun00 said:

---

rootube said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

rootube said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

At a more basic level if there is room for Vandy in big time college Football there is surely room for Tech, Baylor and TCU.

---

That decision is way above your paygrade.

Tech, Baylor and TCU have to pull their own weight.

---

Yea like Vandy is pulling its own weight in the SEC. Baylor and Tech have invested far more in their athletics programs than Vandy, and have far superior results. In some cases matching or exceeding our own despite being on a much smaller budget than us.

---

Oh really?

Quote:

---

University to invest $100 million, with an additional $100 million in donor commitments already secured; funds will support major facilities, operational enhancements

Vanderbilt University today publicly launched the Vandy United Fund, an ambitious fundraising vehicle that will invest $300 million in Vanderbilt's student-athletes and athletics programs through major facilities and operational enhancements.

---

Quote:

---

Since the initial quiet phase of the campaign began in the fall, Vanderbilt has already identified $200 million toward the $300 million goal, with a $100 million commitment from the university, $90 million from anonymous donors and a $10 million lead gift from John R. Ingram, a Board of Trust member and longtime supporter of Vanderbilt Athletics. Now Vanderbilt is reaching out to the broader university community to help support the future of Vanderbilt athletics.

---

Link

---

Hahaha! They are trying to invest $100M in athletics and have a goal to invest $300M. Baylor built an entirely new stadium with B12 money meanwhile Vandy is a playing in a stadium that would be second rate in Texas high school circles.

I just checked Baylor's stadium was $266M which means Baylor has probably invested on the order of nearly three times more than Vandy despite taking in a fraction of the cash Vandy sucks out of the SEC. Vandy has "plans" to invest $300M of which they have collected only $100M. Which begs the question… What the hell are they doing with all that SEC cash.

---

That information is old, from the initial announcement over a year ago. Even so, you misread it. The university was investing $100 million in athletics out of the general university fund (which is unheard of at VU), and $100 million additional had already been pledged and partially collected. Updated numbers would have them well over $200 million raised though not yet at $300 million.

This is the rare case where I have some personal insight, as I've discussed the campaign with a couple people deeply involved. Vanderbilt will never spend on athletics like TAMU, but under the new chancellor they are willing for pretty much the first time in my lifetime to spend enough to have a respectable program. They're very late to the game on NIL, though, so not sure how that will affect them.

---

It was never debatable that Vandy would spend as much as A&M. The debate was do they invest as much as Baylor and the answer is clearly no. It's not possible to visit both football stadiums and come to any other conclusion.

Ag Tag said:

---

Maybe they'll remain in the BDF and it'll become something similar to CUSA or the Sun Belt Conference.

---

That was happening regardless of the PAC blowing up.

tceh to the tortilla conference.

BigDave21 said:

---

The big 12 will like poach the Arizona schools along with Utah and Colorado. If y'all don't see that with tech, Kansas, Arizona, Baylor, UH, etc that they will become the best basketball conference idk what to say. They aren't going anywhere.

---

This seems to be the consensus, but I think that the only way this happens is if UW and Oregon leave the Pac12. And I'm not sure where those 2 will go, if the B1G wanted them they'd already be in. They have bad options (talk to ACC, remain in PAC) or worse options (go independent, push for merger with big 12). The best either of them can probably hope for is that ND decides to join the B1G and they prefer to have an even number of teams so give them a pity invite.

Gigem_94 said:

---

Big 12 is suddenly rethinking or has buyers remorse about adding UH; Cinn; and UCF now that the remaining PAC12 are ripe for poaching

---

I don't think so, they're in the best position to add potential PAC refugees in part b/c of their recent additions. Otherwise it would be the PAC raiding what's left of the big 12.

aggiehawg said:

---

The Chicken Ranch said:

---

All they gave to do is stay where they are at. It looks like the XII will survive and the PAC will not.

The XII may end up being a better league that it was.

---

Quite ironic how that worked out Because of the LHN, Big XII could not have a conference network and all of the riches that would bring for continued survival as a conference.

PAC got a conference network(s) but screwed the pooch in not allowing a media partner to join. Now the LHN is gone and the PAC has lost their most premiere member in USC, further depressing the value of their media rights.

Going back to the Sooners and the sips with tagalongs of Okie Lite and Tech makes financial sense and gets the PAC up to 14 teams with a Central Time Zone presence and new markets.

---

Yeah, in hindsight I'm pretty sure that the PAC would be happy with their current roster + usc, ucla, tu, ou, tech and osu. Now, they have 10 teams, 2 sort-of good headliners, and a million questions, with nobody to blame but themselves for prioritizing academics over athletics in athletic conference affiliation.

Oh, and ironically, the SEC has added 3 AAU institutions in the past 11 years, we are improving the athletics and academics concurrently.

HossAg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

HossAg said:

---

Tech makes more money for a conference than Baylor. If it came down to choosing Baylor or Tech, it would be Tech.

---

SEC has zero need for another school from Texas. None.

Nor do I see the wisdom in going to 18 teams. Sixteen is already too many and with the loss of divisions, choosing a conference champion is just a complicated crap shoot.

---

You gotta look at it differently. The SEC and Big 10 are going to become the new NCAA. They won't care if everyone plays everyone every year. They won't care about "conference champions". The new conference championship is gonna be the College Football Playoff with X amount of teams that's built for the participants of those 2 conferences. There could be like 48 teams between the two conferences to make that work. It may even result in a bunch of divisions within those conferences with way more structure than we had before with various conferences of various sizes. The point is, however it ends up, the conferences will be in control of everything. That's their end goal with all this consolidation.

---

This makes a lot more sense than having a bunch of division 3 chancellors voting on div 1 football matters. The NCAA is dominated by tiny institutions. The gap between the haves and have nots has gotten to be so gargantuan that the best possible outcome would be for the "haves" to separate, at least for football and possibly for everything.

Whether that means 32 division 1 teams or 132 teams, I don't really care much tbh. Just let the people who want to be serious about football get after it, and let all the other play for a participation trophy.

bryanw1995 said:

---

Gigem_94 said:

---

Big 12 is suddenly rethinking or has buyers remorse about adding UH; Cinn; and UCF now that the remaining PAC12 are ripe for poaching

---

I don't think so, they're in the best position to add potential PAC refugees in part b/c of their recent additions. Otherwise it would be the PAC raiding what's left of the big 12.

---

Definitely agree. The additions of Byu, Hou, Ucf, and Cincy were good for that league and now they are in a position to get a Colorado, Utah, Zona, Zona st. Without those additions they would be at 8 schools and they would be the ones getting poached.

Showstopper said:

---

You guys are crazy, Pac is still in a better position than new Big 12. Pac still has Oregon and Washington, which have higher ceilings than, I don't know, Okie State and Baylor? And as far as media markets, Pac still has Seattle, Portland, SF/Bay Area, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, and Denver. Big 12 has, what, Tulsa, Lubbock, and Waco?

Big 12 is still bottom of the barrel even if the other conferences are working hard to get closer to them.

---

Cincinnati? Houston? Obviously you hate the Big 12, but be fair in your comparisons.

Isaiah Robinson just committed to Baylor

Yep. Was expected

aggiehawg said:

---

Buck Turgidson said:

---

The death of the PAC means the Big 12 lives on by bringing in PAC leftovers.

---

Or vice versa. Big XII will never have a conference network.

PAC does. The PAC really screwed it up but they can get a media partner and have a do-over.

Big XII is worthless. Has been for a decade or more.

---

The PAC 12 network is about as worthless as a liberal politician. That conference is losing its ass on that network.

How many of you even have access to the Pac 12 network? I don't.

aggiehawg said:

---

Buck Turgidson said:

---

The death of the PAC means the Big 12 lives on by bringing in PAC leftovers.

---

Or vice versa. Big XII will never have a conference network.

PAC does. The PAC really screwed it up but they can get a media partner and have a do-over.

Big XII is worthless. Has been for a decade or more.

---

The Big 12 is in a much better position than the Pac. West coast football is dead. They can't even get fans to their stadiums.

AGFEVER said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Buck Turgidson said:

---

The death of the PAC means the Big 12 lives on by bringing in PAC leftovers.

---

Or vice versa. Big XII will never have a conference network.

PAC does. The PAC really screwed it up but they can get a media partner and have a do-over.

Big XII is worthless. Has been for a decade or more.

---

The PAC 12 network is about as worthless as a liberal politician. That conference is losing its ass on that network.

How many of you even have access to the Pac 12 network? I don't.

---

The PAC screwed up when they started the network without securing a media partner to get media saturation and contracts for carriage of the channels.

Without the LHN blocking a Big XII network, they could have had a network based on the old cable subscription model. That time has now passed. Different business model.

What you don't seem to understand is that the west coast (in all it's socialism) has become apathetic to football and many sports in general. No one cares out there. As a matter of fact..the leadership at some Pac 12 schools would be fine giving up football altogether.

The network was worthless before it even started because the audience that they were catering to didn't want it. The media partner didn't matter. The left coast is soft and no longer has a need for football. That is one of the reasons UCLA and USC headed east. It's not just the money..its the mindset.

AGFEVER said:

---

What you don't seem to understand is that the west coast (in all it's socialism) has become apathetic to football and many sports in general. No one cares out there. As a matter of fact..the leadership at some Pac 12 schools would be fine giving up football altogether.

The network was worthless before it even started because the audience that they were catering to didn't want it. The media partner didn't matter. The left coast is soft and no longer has a need for football. That is one of the reasons UCLA and USC headed east. It's not just the money..its the mindset.

---

While I agree with that just want to add something that was unique with how the PAC structured their conference network with regional networks for schools.

Arizona: for the two Arizona schools
Mountain: for Colorado and Utah
Bay Area: Cal and Stanford
LA: for USC and UCLA
Oregon: OU, OSU
Washington: UDub and WSU.

Now with the spectacular failure that was the LHN, a single school centric network doesn't have enough content. Now we know a two school centric network doesn't either.

The Big 12 is in great shape........for now

And I personally like the conference now. Won't be high end football but will be decent and competitive

Utah, Arizona, Arizona State and Colorado are reportedly meeting with the Big 12 Conference on Tuesday.@kslsports #GoUtes https://t.co/G8RnmykCYe

— KSL 5 TV (@KSL5TV) July 4, 2022

merch said:

---

Greed destroys. Probably not long and we won't just be saying what happened to Baylor or Tech, we will be saying, remember when people used to watch college football?

---

My thoughts exactly

We'll be like "you maniacs, you blew it up!"

aggiehawg said:

---

Buck Turgidson said:

---

The death of the PAC means the Big 12 lives on by bringing in PAC leftovers.

---

Or vice versa. Big XII will never have a conference network.

PAC does. The PAC really screwed it up but they can get a media partner and have a do-over.

Big XII is worthless. Has been for a decade or more.

---

Pac is done as Oregon and Washington will not stay in that league; they want the big10 and if not I expect them to approach the sec or even the acc

NyAggie said:

---

We'll be like "you maniacs, you blew it up!"

---

LOL!

rootube said:

---

I guess I'm in the minority but I'd like to see as many Texas schools to do well as possible.

---

Do as well as possible yes, however, at a lower level where they belong.

Divining Rod said:

---

BenFiasco14 said:

---

I feel like they're both gonna get hosed and left in the cold. And I can't wait for it.

What happens to them? Relegated to a G5 level conference and forever irrelevant?

---

Really? Man there's rivalry and then there's real life. we should all want our major programs in Texas to be healthy.

---

F those schools. They wanted us to fail, so they can suck it .

I harbor no ill will towards Baylor/TCU/etc, but nor do I wish them "well" necessarily. They're still potential rivals for recruits, after all.

I think that new big 12 brings in a few Pac 12 schools and they end up as a decently-strong ACC-type conference. They'll negotiate a better deal than the ACC though b/c every school currently in the big 12 and that the big 12 is looking at is a football school. They don't have as many fans as we do, but they live and breath it on a comparable level for their size I think.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

At a more basic level if there is room for Vandy in big time college Football there is surely room for Tech, Baylor and TCU.

---

That decision is way above your paygrade.

Tech, Baylor and TCU have to pull their own weight.

---

And that is the big issue. The net is that they are nothing but leech programs that require hand-outs to exist.

Gigem_94 said:

---

Big 12 is suddenly rethinking or has buyers remorse about adding UH; Cinn; and UCF now that the remaining PAC12 are ripe for poaching

---

At least in terms of football, I'd rather have Cincy and UCF than Oregon State and Wassu. I don't know what the "values" put on those schools that is out now that everyone takes as gospel but with the relative sizes of each and the current quality of each program, Cincy/UCF against any of the current B12 schools create a more watchable matchup. Plus, you don't have to schedule it at 9pm Central regardless of where it is played, even if it is the third ranked game of the day.

Quote:

---

The net is that they are nothing but leech programs that require hand-outs to exist.

---

But again, in terms of football, so is a big part of the Pac: at the very least, Arizona, Wassu, and Oregon State most years; Stanford, Cal, and ASU quite a bit, and UW has only had limited success in the last 2 decades. Utah has all but taken over that conference. Stanford had a good run between 2009 and 2018 but other than that, averaged 4 wins a year since 2000. They are every bit the "leech" TCU is.

UH also brings more to the table than those two programs. The reality is there's fat to trim in every conference. Purdue, Iowa, NW, etc should have voted against the B1G expansion because it's only a matter of time before they're on the chopping block. The SEC has these programs as well. Does the SEC really need the #2 program in the state of South Carolina? Or two from the poorest state in the union?

HossAg said:

---

Tech makes more money for a conference than Baylor. If it came down to choosing Baylor or Tech, it would be Tech.

---

Baylor has the best Athletic Department in the entire Country when it comes to revenue sports.

Texas Tech is kinda mediocre.

Tech has still never won the BIGXII in football.
They were so close to winning the 2019 National Title in Mens basketball, but lost in Overtime. Has to sting that the the next two National Champions were conference mates Baylor and Kansas.

The same year that Tech lost the National Title the Baylor women won the 2019 National Title by only one point.

If Tech had won the National Title, and the Baylor hadn't won National Titles in 2019 and 2021 I would certainly say they would be a superior choice than the Bears.

Tech's biggest problem is that they are located out in the middle of nowhere, while Baylor is located right in the middle of the state close to all of the Texas population centers.

At first I thought that USC and UCLA moving over would mean the PAC 12 would raid the Big 12 but its looking like I was wrong. Might end up being the other way around.

Kellso said:

---

HossAg said:

---

Tech makes more money for a conference than Baylor. If it came down to choosing Baylor or Tech, it would be Tech.

---

Baylor has the best Athletic Department in the entire Country when it comes to revenue sports.

Texas Tech is kinda mediocre.

Tech has still never won the BIGXII in football.
They were so close to winning the 2019 National Title in Mens basketball, but lost in Overtime. Has to sting that the the next two National Champions were conference mates Baylor and Kansas.

The same year that Tech lost the National Title the Baylor women won the 2019 National Title by only one point.

If Tech had won the National Title, and the Baylor hadn't won National Titles in 2019 and 2021 I would certainly say they would be a superior choice than the Bears.

Tech's biggest problem is that they are located out in the middle of nowhere, while Baylor is located right in the middle of the state close to all of Texas population centers.

---

And yet, Tech has way, way better fan support than Baylor...in all sports. Tech's football program has been dismal the past 10-14 years, one of the worst stretches ever in its history, and yet we still draw more fans to our games out in Lubbock than Baylor and TCU have in their more populated locations. Why? Because Tech has a fanatical alumni base that those two schools don't have.

Tech sells out a 15,000 seat basketball arena with a first year head coach while Baylor can't sell out their home arena after winning the national championship.

Tech has better NIL funding in the works than Okie St, Baylor, TCU, UH, etc.

Tech bring a lot to the table, moreso than these other programs who have had better success on the gridiron lately than we have had. We also have more than twice the student enrollment of Baylor and three times as much as TCU.

Yeah, Tech is more "isolated" geographically, but we have better attendance and better numbers across the board than most of the rest of the Big XII.

Sterling82 said:

---

I hope they find a way to flourish. Why should I wish to see fewer opportunities for high school athletes to compete at a high level in college?

---

Because those two schools specifically are trash schools, filled with trash people and even trashier attitudes. Let them crumble into nothingness and the world will be a better place...