FSU? (Depending how far back you wanna go to define “new”)
Conference Realignment
- Thread starter DavidBenAkiva
- Start date
ChillinDuke
Member
Assume you're joking? Looking longingly at this list of stalwarts?
Boise State
Colorado State
Fresno State
Oregon State
San Diego State
Utah State
Washington State
Other than having some semblance of regional continuity, this is a far cry form Arizona, UCLA, USC, Washington, and Oregon. I give the P12 credit for pulling itself up off the mat, but once you get past the hubbub and look at the actual members it's not all that inspiring.
- Chillin
Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
Member
I mean, yes, I assume the Good DBR user was joking. It's definitely a step down by most metrics.
LeadingEdge
Member
I did some history reconstruction. It appears Stanford and Cal pursued ACC membership rather than B12 membership because those schools preferred the ACC, likely for academic and Olympic sports reasons. When it looked like the ACC might not work out for Stanford and Cal, they expressed some interest to the B12, but then the ACC came through, mooting any move to the B12.
Before the ACC deal finalized, word leaked out that the B12 was unlikely to take Cal and Standford anyway, because it had what it wanted for the time being. The likely explanation is adding Stanford and Cal would not gain enough TV revenue to maintain the per-school payout.
Why does this matter? If Stanford and Cal preferred the distant ACC to the nearby B12, even with the B12 was getting the Four Corners schools (former P12 members), Stanford and Cal would have to be super hard up to join the new P12, which will be an Olympic sports desert comprised of effectively open enrollment schools with almost no grad research bona fides. If that was the only option, perhaps Cal and Stanford would try to work something with the other selective UC schools.
Before the ACC deal finalized, word leaked out that the B12 was unlikely to take Cal and Standford anyway, because it had what it wanted for the time being. The likely explanation is adding Stanford and Cal would not gain enough TV revenue to maintain the per-school payout.
Why does this matter? If Stanford and Cal preferred the distant ACC to the nearby B12, even with the B12 was getting the Four Corners schools (former P12 members), Stanford and Cal would have to be super hard up to join the new P12, which will be an Olympic sports desert comprised of effectively open enrollment schools with almost no grad research bona fides. If that was the only option, perhaps Cal and Stanford would try to work something with the other selective UC schools.
CameronBornAndBred
Well-known member
No, I was asking a serious question. A couple other posters noted that they are now only one team away from being a big boy conference again, that's all that matters. If the competition is less than before, than they should be happy at their prospects of regular playoff trips, and should be happy about not flying across the country every other weekend.
AustinDevil
Member
Surely, though, you see the facts. They’re not one team away from being a “big boy” conference—they’re one team away from being a conference at all. The money is a projection and is not likely to be an improvement over Stanford’s and Cal’s partial ACC shares (which aren’t partial forever), and the desperation deal they struck with the MWC for this year is haunting them as they may owe looting fees (they just sued to avoid those and the media reports make their arguments look as weak as FSU/Clemson arguments against the GOR.
And beside that, and the Olympic sports issues mentioned above, Stanford and Cal do not want to associate with Fresno State. Period.
As AD said, the P12 and MWC are one team away from being a qualified FBS conference. As currently configured, the P12 champion will probably be the 5th highest rated one and qualify for the playoff ahead of the AAC or MWC champ, but not guaranteed by any stretch.
What is the reason for this? If it’s college rankings, Louisville and Fresno Stare are comparable.
Some other issue??
AustinDevil
Member
I am sure they don’t want to be affiliated with Louisville, either, but it was a necessary evil for them to get in a club with Duke, UVa, Notre Dame, UNC*, etc. There are no Dukes, UVas, Notre Dames, or UNCs in the new PAC Whatever. SDSU has stellar programs but not the same cache, and there is a vertiginous drop off after that.
*Annoyingly, UNC still has academic cache despite their unpunished and shocking transgressions.
JasonEvans
Host, The Duke Basketball Roundup
I mean, if you are wondering where Cal (#17) and Stanford (#4) belong culturally, look at the US News rankings:
ACC
Duke - #6Notre Dame - #18
UVA - #24
UNC #27
Ga Tech - #33
BC - #37
Wake Forest - #46
Virginia Tech - #51
FSU - #54
NC State - #58
Miami - #63
Pitt - #70
Syracuse - #73
Clemson - #80
Louisville - #179
The current Pac-12
SDSU - #109Oregon State - #144
Colorado State - #148
Fresno State - #179
Washington St - #189
Utah State - #259
Boise State - #296
Louisville really sticks out, doesn't it?
LeadingEdge
Member
If you run the same comparison between the ACC and the B12, you'll get a somewhat comparable result.
If you compare undergrad rankings, the ACC is the clear #1 of the power conferences. If you compare on research dollars, which is mainly a grad school thing, then the B10 takes the lead because the ACC has some schools that are fairly/highly selective for undergrad but are not grad/research powerhouses (e.g., BC, Wake, and ND (putting it in the AAC was a huge reach).
Many B10 schools are the inverse - only modestly selective for undergrad but highly respected research powerhouses on the grad and grant funding level (e.g., Purdue).
OK, so it's not Fresno State specifically, just the overall poor ratings of other other schools (Fresno State is the median). Yeah, Stanford and Cal do not belong with this group academically.
The current Pac-12
SDSU - #109
Oregon State - #144
Colorado State - #148
Fresno State - #179
Washington St - #189
Utah State - #259
Boise State - #296
TheDevilMadeMeDoIt
Member
Getting comfortable with the Cal and Stanford additions seems to be growing on some of us. Many on here have complained for years we should be playing the Vanderbilts and Northwesterns in football. Now the ACC is the smart student conference. We should lean into that without becoming the snobby school conference. Honestly if FSU and Clemson leave it will improve our selectivity average. Also still not sure the SEC or the Big want either one of those.
TheDevilMadeMeDoIt
Member
Also just remembered that UNC did not want these schools. Another good reason to welcome them.
AustinDevil
Member
The reason I singled out Fresno State because it is by far the nearest "New PAC" school to Stanford and Cal, so they're pretty familiar with it, and the cultural gulf between the Bay Area and the Central Valley is as big as, well, the cultural gulf between Austin and [pick any number of towns about 175 miles from Austin in West Texas].
brevity
Member
Here's a very recent illustration. This is what the College Football Playoff would look like if you used the US News scholastic rankings instead of the CFP football rankings, but kept everything else (FBS teams only, automatic bid for top 5 conferences in the rankings, 7 at-large bids for the highest ranked teams without auto bids):
1. Stanford (ACC auto bid) -- #4 overall in US News
2. Northwestern (Big 10 auto bid) -- tied at #6
3. Rice (American auto bid) -- tied at #18
4. Vanderbilt (SEC auto bid) -- tied at #18
5. Duke (ACC at-large) -- tied at #6
6. UCLA (Big 10 at-large) -- tied at #15
7. California (ACC at-large) -- #17
8. Notre Dame (Independent) -- tied at #18
9. Michigan (Big 10 at-large) -- tied at #21
10. Virginia (ACC at-large) -- tied at #24
11. Either UNC (ACC at-large) or USC (Big 10 at-large) -- tied at #27
12. Buffalo (Mid-American auto bid) -- tied at #76
I would think Buffalo would be the 5 seed as an auto bid, rather than a 12 seed. (No Big 12 at all; Baylor, at #91, is their highest ranked school.)
Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
Member
Just to be contrarian - how much longer can colleges and universities correlate academics and sports?
In other words, what does it mean to brag about your student athletes when your athletes are being paid to attend your college and not held to the same entrance requirements?
Isn't it sort of like being proud of living next door to someone famous? Does being "academic adjacent" give a sports team reason to brag? Just because your basketball stadium is on a campus doesn't really make it an academic endeavor.
In other words, what does it mean to brag about your student athletes when your athletes are being paid to attend your college and not held to the same entrance requirements?
Isn't it sort of like being proud of living next door to someone famous? Does being "academic adjacent" give a sports team reason to brag? Just because your basketball stadium is on a campus doesn't really make it an academic endeavor.
LeadingEdge
Member
I don't understand the inclusion of Buffalo. If the top academic schools from the ACC, B10, B12, and SEC get autobids, wouldn't Rice be the best G5 academic "champion"?
brevity
Member
They don't. Sticking to football for a moment, it's the top 5 conference champions ranked by the CFP. The names of the conferences aren't specified. Generally, those 4 power conferences will get auto bids, but there's no guarantee of that.
Consider a situation (probably in the ACC or Big 12) where an undefeated and heavily favored team (say, Miami or Utah) loses their conference championship to some team with 2 or 3 losses (say, Pittsburgh or Arizona State). It's possible that the unlikely conference champion DOESN'T make the playoff if they're ranked behind 5 other conference champions.
In this US News illustration, the top 5 conference auto bids go to the ACC, Big 10, American, SEC, and Mid-American.