Is the Pac 12 done?

[celticsclay]

Looks like AZ, ASU, and Utah are going to be in Big 12, leaving just 4 teams left in the PAC.  Not sure OSU and WSU will have much interest, but Stanford and Cal seem like they should. 

So does the Big Ten just go with 2 9 team divisions  (at least for football)

East - Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan St., Indiana, Purdue, Illinois

West - Oregon, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern

Seems pretty balanced and every major rivalry is kept as a division game except one (sorry Illinois/Northwestern)

Absolute zero interest in OSU and WSU from P5 conferences.  Academics is the only reason for any interest in Cal and Standford.  If the Big Ten doesn't take them, I don't know where they'll land. 

With the Pac12 gone, I expect they'll change the playoffs to top 5 conference champs and the best 7 at large.  They won't want 2 G5 teams in the playoffs.

Big 12 adding the Cali teams makes some sense since the conference doesn't have any Cali teams and does now stretch out to Arizona.

I don’t think big 12 would want those teams for football, it would really drag down computer ratings and increase travel (and it’s not line people in San Francisco or Oakland even follow cal I lived there a long time). Stanford used to be more respectable in football but they are headed in the wrong direction fast. I wonder if cal, Stanford, Oregon state and Washington state may all drop down a level in football.

[Moranis]

Looks like AZ, ASU, and Utah are going to be in Big 12, leaving just 4 teams left in the PAC.  Not sure OSU and WSU will have much interest, but Stanford and Cal seem like they should. 

So does the Big Ten just go with 2 9 team divisions  (at least for football)

East - Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan St., Indiana, Purdue, Illinois

West - Oregon, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern

Seems pretty balanced and every major rivalry is kept as a division game except one (sorry Illinois/Northwestern)

The Big 10 was already dropping divisions prior to Oregon and Washington, and I wouldn’t expect them to change that.

16 is harder than 18 with divisions (though I always though they should go to a pod system). And when Michigan and Ohio State play on back to back weekends multiple times, they will get rid of that.  You detract from the best rivalry in sports if they rematch constantly (and they would have rematched the last 2 seasons and 3 of the last 5).  They should have done a pod system and when they go to 18 they should go to divisions.  It is the only way to really ensure the 2 best teams end up playing.  Heck that Pac 12 had that problem this year with Washington not making the Pac 12 title game despite being the 2nd best team in the conference. 

[Moranis]

Also, an interesting thought, might Oregon St. and Washington St. actually be better off in a conference like the Mountain West.  Obviously way less money, but they'd actually have a real chance to not only win the MWC, but also qualify for the playoffs.  Those teams haven't been real contenders in the PAC (at least for a very long time if not ever), but they could win the Mountain West and consistently be in the discussion to do so.  And the footprint is roughly the same as the PAC so travel isn't much different (aside from the Hawaii trip every so often).  Maybe Stanford and Cal end up there as well, making a 16 team MWC.

[celticsclay]

Also, an interesting thought, might Oregon St. and Washington St. actually be better off in a conference like the Mountain West.  Obviously way less money, but they'd actually have a real chance to not only win the MWC, but also qualify for the playoffs.  Those teams haven't been real contenders in the PAC (at least for a very long time if not ever), but they could win the Mountain West and consistently be in the discussion to do so.  And the footprint is roughly the same as the PAC so travel isn't much different (aside from the Hawaii trip every so often).  Maybe Stanford and Cal end up there as well, making a 16 team MWC.

I think they are definitely worse off. For one we can’t gloss over the lost money. It is significant and helps pay for their other programs. Two, Oregon state hasn’t been that awful in basketball historically. They obviously had their crazy run to the elite 8 a few years ago. They have been to the tourney a few times in the last 8 years and also have a half dozen sweet 16 trips in their history. Oregon state is actually to 15 preseason in college football this year (though they have obviously been very poor historically). Usually when you go down a level your recruits also go down a level. Washington state was kind of irrelevant in both sports either way, but yeah no way to spin losing massive money as a positive in any way.

[Moranis]

ACC plans on meeting to discuss adding Cal and Stanford, though it may not be financially feasible for either school or the existing ACC schools.  That seems much weirder than the Big Ten stretching out that far as only Pittsburgh and Louisville are in states that aren't on the Atlantic Ocean (their states also border existing member states, so a full contiguous conference). I guess they do have Notre Dame, but Indiana is a long way from the west coast. Going all the way to the west coast for two schools that aren't going to move the needle financially seems like a stretch, but that is how desperate the ACC is and presumably Cal and Stanford are. 

If the Big 12 isn't interested, maybe the 4 get some teams from other conferences and form a smaller 10 team conference with some of the better teams from the other conferences.

Maybe something like: OSU, WSU, Stan, Cal, SDSU, Fresno, Boise, UNLV, SMU, UTSA

That is a decent conference.  Not great, but decent.  And perhaps they add a couple of non-football schools and bring in Gonzaga and Saint Mary's (or something like that).

Should be interesting to see how it all shakes out.

[green_bballers13]

College football is regressing, not improving. Shocker that money is getting in the way of this, as well.

[Moranis]

So the 4 ACC schools most linked to wanting out all opposed adding Stanford and Cal.  They are FSU, UNC, Clemson, and NC St.  Clemson and UNC ideally want the Big Ten while the other 2 want to go to the SEC, though I think all 4 would be fine in either of the big 2.

[Moranis]

Looks like ACC is getting closetr to adding not just Cal and Stanford, but also SMU getting them into Texas and helping bridge the land gap to California.

[Donoghus]

Looks like ACC is getting closetr to adding not just Cal and Stanford, but also SMU getting them into Texas and helping bridge the land gap to California.

Academically, the ACC would be getting 3 great schools there.

[Moranis]

ACC has voted to admit, Cal, Stanford, and SMU

Poor Oregon St. and Washington St. left out and all alone.

[Donoghus]

ACC has voted to admit, Cal, Stanford, and SMU

Poor Oregon St. and Washington St. left out and all alone.

Mountain West would make some sense.

[tazzmaniac]

ACC has voted to admit, Cal, Stanford, and SMU

Poor Oregon St. and Washington St. left out and all alone.

UNC voted against it and I assume that FSU and Clemson did too.  I think it is a dumb decision.  Cal, Stanford and SMU add little to the ACC from a sports perspective.  Appears to be just a short-term money grab.  At least the Big10, added the better Pac12 teams. 

[Donoghus]

ACC has voted to admit, Cal, Stanford, and SMU

Poor Oregon St. and Washington St. left out and all alone.

UNC voted against it and I assume that FSU and Clemson did too.  I think it is a dumb decision.  Cal, Stanford and SMU add little to the ACC from a sports perspective.  Appears to be just a short-term money grab.  At least the Big10, added the better Pac12 teams.

I think they're just proactively trying to mitigate the damage that's mostly likely coming down the road with Clemson, FSU, UNC, & NC St.

[Moranis]

The other schools convinced NC State to vote yes, but Clemson, North Carolina, and Florida State all voted no.  Those 3 all want out and I'm sure the Big Ten and SEC would take them if they could (UNC and Clemson to Big Tem and FSU to SEC makes most sense).

As for the ACC, they needed to be proactive. Something they haven't been for years.  And while the 3 schools aren't exactly football powers, they are excellent academic schools with big successful other sport programs.  Plus, all 3 agreed to a lesser share and they do provide access to 2 of the biggest tv markets (San Fran and Dallas) in the 2 biggest states in the country.  There is immense value in that.  Now ACC schools have regular games in Texas and California.  That is important for recruiting.

[tazzmaniac]

ACC has voted to admit, Cal, Stanford, and SMU

Poor Oregon St. and Washington St. left out and all alone.

UNC voted against it and I assume that FSU and Clemson did too.  I think it is a dumb decision.  Cal, Stanford and SMU add little to the ACC from a sports perspective.  Appears to be just a short-term money grab.  At least the Big10, added the better Pac12 teams.

I think they're just proactively trying to mitigate the damage that's mostly likely coming down the road with Clemson, FSU, UNC, & NC St.

If the ACC agreement could be broken, they'd have already done so.  Those teams are stuck until 2036 which is a long, long time away.