PAC 12

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunT

If this contract actually turns out to be accurate, someone needs to ask Dr. Maggard if there is a push to build a larger Southern based G5 conference and coalition, maybe uniting with the rest of the AAC? That would certainly be in his and the universities interest.

---

If the money is real, Tulane and Memphis will move when their buyout drops. Then, things will bet really interesting.

I don't think the PAC will expand eastward more than that. The AAC and the SBC will enter a staring contest. There will be way more money per school available if there is a best of the rest Southern Conference. That will be more easily accomplished by the AAC cherry picking the SBC. I'm pretty sure we will be in that mix.

But, if there is any shot of a PAC invite, if the money is real, you have to make an effort for that as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ColaCajun

That's my biggest worry and my #1 reason why we need to push for PAC. If AAC loses Memphis, Tulane and USF to either B12 or ACC, then Texas AAC schools might push for PAC. JMU, CCU, GA Southern, GSU, ODU, App & Marshall would be fools not to join AAC to form a east coast league. That would leave us with a very depleted league that no one, especially donors or recruits, would be interested in.

No one thought the SBC would be as strong as it is now back in 2012 when the schools left for CUSA. I strongly believe that we got lucky and I don't see that happening again. We've got momentum with new football stadium and new MBB coach and we need to capitalize on it.

---

I don't forsee Memphis, Tulane or USF in the Big 12 or the ACC. This is why they are considering the PAC membership today. They have been chasing the Big 12 dream for some time now.

There will be another split at the top 40 to 50 programs and they will have the highest TV Revenue package and their own playoff system. The rest will remain exactly where they are at today, or a in a conference with members like Oregon State and Washington State that will not make the Top 40 or 50. Moving conferences at that point will only become a schedule alliance because it doesn't achieve the goal of joining those programs that have split from the old P4 conferences for Football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BayouRichard

Always keep your resume warm and never burn a bridge on the way out. With that said what’s wrong with Window shopping?

---

It's in a binder somewhere in the AD's office.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cajunrunner

I was told last summer that Texas State had launched an athletic and overall university initiative in the Hill Country region that angered UTSA and UT-Austin, and some of those school's external "important people".

I know we've done that SOME ourselves, but have we done enough of that. While that promotion doesn't seem to have improved TX State athletics at least wins/losses wise for this current athletic year, it sure seems to have helped in gaining some eyes.

---

They win in branding temporarily and financially. In the long run they will move to a more geographically Western conference but remain slightly above the Mountain West. They will never be in the new power conference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunT

I don't forsee Memphis, Tulane or USF in the Big 12 or the ACC. This is why they are considering the PAC membership today. They have been chasing the Big 12 dream for some time now.

There will be another split at the top 40 to 50 programs and they will have the highest TV Revenue package and their own playoff system. The rest will remain exactly where they are at today, or a in a conference with members like Oregon State and Washington State that will not make the Top 40 or 50. Moving conferences at that point will only become a schedule alliance because it doesn't achieve the goal of joining those programs that have split from the old P4 conferences for Football.

---

Once the ACC brass moves to the SEC/B10…you can bet your bottom dollar Tulane and Memphis will hook up with WF, Syracuse, BC, NC State, Virginia, Louisville, GT and etc. in a watered down ACC. That is what they are holding out for, otherwise they would have joined the PAC already. The PAC needs a travel partner for TXST, why not us? No exit fees and clearly one of the top athletic programs in the SBC/G6.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunT

I don't forsee Memphis, Tulane or USF in the Big 12 or the ACC. This is why they are considering the PAC membership today. They have been chasing the Big 12 dream for some time now.

There will be another split at the top 40 to 50 programs and they will have the highest TV Revenue package and their own playoff system. The rest will remain exactly where they are at today, or a in a conference with members like Oregon State and Washington State that will not make the Top 40 or 50. Moving conferences at that point will only become a schedule alliance because it doesn't achieve the goal of joining those programs that have split from the old P4 conferences for Football.

---

This is what I see happening too. So, what is the best place for UL, if we are not in that top 40-50. Yes, geography plays a part, but also there will be tiers in the next group of schools based upon TV contracts. If we want to be a big player in that next level of schools, we need to maximize TV revenue, which may be the PAC or some re-jiggered SBC/ACC look. Some of this is going to be luck, but the more prepared you are, the luckier you get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunRebel

$13.4M dollars is really hard to turn down.

With that said, every away conference game would be in the mountain and pacific time zones. Away basketball games would start at 8-9pm. Away football games would usually start at 10:30pm. And I suspect all our home games would be early because we’d be the only team in the conference that could fill an early time slot. So brutal for the fan base.

---

I think a lot of their games are day games, especially in winter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cajunrunner

I was told last summer that Texas State had launched an athletic and overall university initiative in the Hill Country region that angered UTSA and UT-Austin, and some of those school's external "important people".

I know we've done that SOME ourselves, but have we done enough of that. While that promotion doesn't seem to have improved TX State athletics at least wins/losses wise for this current athletic year, it sure seems to have helped in gaining some eyes.

---

As a market, the PAC 12 is looking at Texas State because they are right in the middle of Austin and San Antonio and are claiming those markets.

UL is right in the middle of Baton Rouge and Lake Charles. If we similarly claim those markets combined with Lafayette, we have a bigger market than Tulane does. We need to sell this. And we need to sell our athletic facilities and R1 academic status.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonCajun

As a market, the PAC 12 is looking at Texas State because they are right in the middle of Austin and San Antonio and are claiming those markets.

UL is right in the middle of Baton Rouge and Lake Charles. If we similarly claim those markets combined with Lafayette, we have a bigger market than Tulane does. We need to sell this. And we need to sell our athletic facilities and R1 academic status.

---

...Could Alex and maybe the thib/Race/M city be taken in the mix?

Remember Tech in the WAC? lol. Point made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UL_Cajuns

Remember Tech in the WAC? lol. Point made.

---

Yeah, the WAC annual payout was out of whack with reality, it didn't justify their presence.

We need an athletic department with a pulse. We can't even plan ahead for water at a hot football game.. Will never happen.