OT: SDSU Submits letter to "resign" from MWC
According to Pete Thamel, SDSU, without an invitation to the PAC-12, has submitted a letter resigning from the conference.
SDSU apparently needed to do so before July 1 in order to save money on some conference fees or rights or something, as the conference year ends June 30th.
This combined with the likelihood that Colorado is moving back to the Big 12 (there is a "special" BOD meeting scheduled for Monday 6/19) would suggest that SDSU is expecting an invite and needed to make a move before July 1 in order to be available.
that stadium just won't look the same 2/3 full with a PAC? logo on the field as it did 2/3 full with the MWC logo
I enjoyed playing at the murph, now known as quuallcom
Saw my one and only non-Michigan football game with Marshall Faulk running all over the field.
May the Murph rest in peace since they demolished it a couple of years ago.
did not know they demo'd it. oh well, it was nice while it lasted.
I am in San Diego all the time and it was pretty weird driving down Friars Road and not seeing it there. Even In Cahoots (long time country bar off Friars) closed a few years ago.
The Murph aka Qualcomm is no more. It was torn down three years ago and replaced with Snapdragon Stadium (Snapdragon is a Qualcomm brand). Part of the old stadium grounds will be used for expansion of the SDSU campus.
The ageing old stadium has been under discussion for replacement for some time. A deal couldn't be made with the Chargers (ownership wanted the non-starter of a bay-front location and the taxpayers to fund it). Given the local constraints, a deal to rebuild on a multipurpose site seems a reasonable compromise.
went to an sdsu game last year at the new stadium. it felt like any other new generic multipurpose stadium. hopefully they built this to be the one thing in fashion valley that doesnt flood when it rains
The dominos are starting to fa... clap.
sounds like the Pac10 is going to be resigning from Earth.
Bet they can hear football
Is this fake? Sleeves???
The only question is whether Washington and Oregon have done enough begging to get the invite they asked for a year ago to the B10? Attention PAC 12 athletic directors, find the nearest lifeboat and pray it floats.
I think the Pac 12 planned for life boats the way the Titanic did.
It's also pissible the Big 12 is after SDSU because of basketball. The Big 12 appears to be after UConn, and rumor has it, a couple if ither Big East schiols.
Arizona may also be leaving the Pac 12 and going to the Big 12.
"It's also pissible the Big 12 is after SDSU..."
"pissible" should be a word. I completely understood its implications in the given context.
A perfectly cromulent word.
Fat finger and trying to type fast because I'm at work
"Fat finger and trying to type fast because I'm at work"
Of course. Some typos are just inherently humorous. Yours gave me a bit of a chuckle.
Don't excuse it. Claim it! It's great.
If it catches on—which it totally should—you'll end up in the Oxford English Dictionary.
Can I make money off that?
Well, not exactly. BUT if you happen to be in a bar and sitting next to a brainy guy or gal, you might get a free beer.
They're just trying to position themselves to be relevant in the future. I think the Big 10 is being too cautious because they don't want to look like the conference that broke the wheel. Truth is the wheel was going to be broken anyway. The Big 10 needs to go to 4 divisions with 7 or 8 teams. Pick up every school who has brand recognition and regional value. Don't wait on the SEC or Big 12 to cherry pick, leave crumbs and have a say in anything. Pick the very best and be the league that leaves the crumbs. Being the #1 league in college sports without any question puts them in a position of power regarding all of college sports. Fortune favors the bold.
But for most teams they would add at this point, the per school payouts would go down. Notre Dame is the only likely exception to that. Otherwise they are diluting their current school payouts, or creating a conference of unequal payouts, and that has downsides.
I think any addition to the conference would result in a reduced payout per team.
I don’t think adding a team in the near term is going to result in the current TV deal increasing, so you’re technically correct. But there are a few schools that adding would result in a pretty decent increase in the NEXT contract.
I think ND is the only school that could be added with a “net” effect of zero change, or increase, in payout.
I’m not opposed to adding to the conference. It’s already far larger than I would prefer in my appreciation of tradition - and - getting off my lawn.
This being said - academic reputation and athletic strength are required attributes. So, Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Cal, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, Georgia Tech - and a few others - would definitely be candidates to consider.
Time will tell - and time isn’t standing still either. The only thing I’m pretty certain of is - the hands of time won’t be turning backward - and conference expansion isn’t over.
What if you brought in schools commensurate to their current payout or value and when the new TV deal is being negotiated, look at bringing them in as equals or based on their brand and regional value? At the end of the day, if you have the best schools/teams, you can negotiate a bigger deal because there's no other league that can compete. You could have separate deals with networks covering different divisions or regions.
D - I don’t think the conference will go to unequal distribution. It’s the principle - every member is an equal - at least in elements that can be controlled. Media revenue is definitely something that can be controlled.
It’s just my take…
I don't understand the thinking that passing up a chance to capture the Pacific NW is a losing proposition.
I agree the current conference realignment situation is totally pissable🚽
Hope they don't piss away this chance....
I want to quit the gym.
Conference expansion will continue until morale improves.
I've heard this argument that Washington and Oregon don't pull their weight, but I think that's myopic. Oregon brings in Nike, and Washington brings in a huge regional following plus Big Ten alums galore (like Washington Wolverines!). Plus you significantly reduce travel by having 4 teams vs. only 2 on the west coast. USC and UCLA benefit from UO and UDub. Kind of like Temptation and Hawaiian War Chant, "You can't have one without the other!"
“You can’t have one without the other”… it sounds like Francis Albert Sinatra crooning about Love and Marriage.
It seems more like.. an arranged marriage… or, perhaps, one of necessity.
Outside of being in the same time zone, there’s actually not much benefit to adding Oregon and Washington for USC and UCLA. LA to Seattle is roughly the same distance as LA to Lincoln, so I doubt it moves the needle a whole lot. Sure, it beats traveling to College Park or Piscataway, but you’re still talking an 1,100 mile trip. Still a pain in the butt.
The downside for the rest of the B1G is an additional trip out west every year.
It'll be interesting. I think the teams travelling to USC/UCLA are going to be effected more then USC/UCLA traveling to the other schools.
The time zone difference is going to mean teams are getting home pretty late, if not in the early hours of the morning, from games at USC/UCLA.
I'm not sure the 1,100 miles between Seattle and LA "significantly" reduces travel.
Tha's about the same distance as New York to Tampa, and no one has ever considered them neighbors.
Still, your overall point, that it does reduce travel, is worth considering.
EDIT: Or the same distance as State College to Lincoln.
Oregon brings in Nike
Only for Oregon. For them it would be a big plus. But there is no reason to think that bringing Oregon into the B1G will mean more Nike $$ coming the other B1G teams any more than there are already.
Yeah i didn’t understand that argument. Nike is signed with dozens of teams throughout the nation that aren’t in the same conference as Oregon. Oregon to the B1G does nothing in regards to Nike.
There are two possible destinations - the Big 12 or Pac-12. Where will SDSU wind up?
Either conference seems plausible - though the Pac-12 seems more geographically logical. Logic doesn’t seem to be driving many decisions these days.
If there had never been conference title games...The Big Ten maybe goes to 11, but likely stands pat after that...until the BTN makes TV subscribers the driving force in expansion. And once that happens, things definitely get silly. Megaconferences definitely still happen. I think it's fair to say that this was inevitable, and the BTN is what made it happen.
Dammit, even in alternate history I can't imagine a world where the game doesn't gets nationalized. I had this whole idea of "does the SWC stay together?" But at somepoint, something like the BTN is going to happen, and then consolidation happens. I guess it's always happened tho. Rice used to play Texas. Idaho used to play Oregon. This is the way.
The Big Ten went to 11 long before getting a conference championship game was in discussion. Like… 20 years prior.
yea but the SEC went to 12 to get a conference championship game in that timeframe. And I'm sure the breakup of the SWC went different for the Big 8 schools if there was no conference championship incentive to go to 12
EDIT: and on the one hand, how cool would it have been if the Big "12" had just been the Big 8 and Texas and A&M? NU-OU probably stay an annual game. But then, we don't get the night of Michael Crabtree in Lubbock against UT without Tech in the Big 12. So I'm regretting even the most basic parts of my alternate history.
Still, conferences are better when everyone can play everyone.
If there had never been conference title games...The Big Ten maybe goes to 11
I’m just speaking specifically to this statement. The Big Ten going to 11 had nothing to do with conference title games. It happened way before and was happening regardless. I also don’t believe the Big Ten was going to turn away Nebraska or (theoretically) Notre Dame as a 12th member. Conference title game or not.
If I recall the Big Ten expansion talk in ~2010, the major consideration was getting to 12 to add a conference title game. Same with the Pac 10. Nebraska was the best of several moderately appealing options but no slam dunks, outside of Notre Dame. Remember, the conference was looking at Missouri, rumors of Pittsburgh, and others, and Nebraska wasn't inevitable.
I disagree about whether the Big Ten would have turned Nebraska away if there were no conference title game. Nebraska was a valuable brand and expanded the BTN footprint, plus they're a cultural and geographic fit (if you don't mind stretching West a bit). But I don't think they're a net contributor now, and I'm not sure they were then. They came in and were placed opposite Penn State as supposed equals, as M-OSU were. In the current round, USC has taken their spot in the top 4 of the conference (based on the round robin in 24-25 schedules). I think they were supposed to draw TV viewers and subscribers at a similar level to the big 3, and now they appear to have dropped to the Iowa-Wisconsin etc. tier. Solid conference member, but I don't think they expand the proverbial pie. Smallest state in the conference by population and no longer an AAU member (fair or not) - I think if the B1G could get a do-over, they would pass on Nebraska in favor of someone else.
Yes, the Big Ten wanting to get to 12 was largely about getting a conference title game. But getting to 11 was not. Penn State was added because they fit geographically, culturally, academically, and were a historic power.
And if Notre Dame or Nebraska had wanted to join, I don’t see the B1G turning them down. In some alternate universe where Penn State was never added as the 11th team, the B1G would still have welcomed ND or Nebraska with open arms. They’re just a fit. Even as #12, if they asked the B1G if they could join then I don’t see a scenario where they’re denied. Too much history, too much national recognition and brand power.
But this one goes to 11…
PAC12 breaking apart really sucks. I don't think it can draw enough anchor schools to keep a 'Power 5' designation. It would have to keep Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Cal, and add SDSU, to make that happen. Motivated by conference TV revenue, any of the four anchors that get a BIG10 offer will take it.