The Pac-16

Would a Pac-16 "super-conference" have surpassed the SEC within the next five years?

  • Total voters
    0
#1
Tenacious D

Tenacious D

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
3,336
Likes
1
#1
Had the Pac-10 been successful in becoming the nation's first 16-team, "super-conference" by adding Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and Utah - do you believe that they would have overtaken the SEC in terms of conference superiority (i.e. money, championships, national prominence, etc.) within the next 5 years?

Here's your chance to go on the record, either way.

Shout out to Droski.
 
#2
#2
Hard for a 16 team conference not to generate more money than a 12, especially considering they'd have some quality teams in there.

Texas, USC, Oklahoma, Oregon, UCLA, Oklahoma State, Utah, and Cal/Oregon St. and the rest are pretty imposing.

vs.

Alabama, Florida, LSU, Georgia, Auburn, Tennessee, Ole Miss, and Arkansas (?)

The SEC definitely drops off after the top 3.
 
#4
#4
I voted yes.

I'm not ruling this out to happen later on, Dan Beebe was only putting band aids over the cracks in the dam.
 
#6
#6
No. Having 16 teams in the Pac-10 simply means 15 of them can't be a national champion. It makes the big fish just more small fish in a big pond. Texas/OU/etc. would hurt their chances by joining the Pac-10.

Meanwhile, the BCS formula of SEC vs. ___________ would hold true.
 
#9
#9
Who was in serious discussion to join the sec that would have made the conference significantly better?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#10
#10
milohimself said:
Who was in serious discussion to join the sec that would have made the conference significantly better?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I don't know how "serious", but reportedly aTm, Oklahoma. Florida State and Clemson or Duke. Also North Carolina. All conjecture because of the Pac 10's efforts collapsed.
 
#11
#11
This thread is conjecture. Okie was never going to be in the sec. The others you listed would be like adding a bunch of Arkansas and south carolinas again without the benefit like a conference title game.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#12
#12
Another supposed theory was that we would have gone to four divisions and a mini playoff for the championship. Effectively forcing the play off system on the NCAA, while keeping the bowls viable.

Every Conference has less than stellar teams FS will be relevant again, North Carolina plays solid and Oklahoma was a coin flip.
 
#13
#13
Crass as it sounds, Bobby Bowden will need to pass and fsu will need years of turnover before they are relevant again.

I don't think unc can ever be more than an occasionally decent team ESP. In the sec.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#15
#15
Most people on here simply won't see eye to eye with me on this, but it would eventually happen.

Not off the bat because of what's happening at USC but when they regain footing, having socal and Texas providing talent for one conference simply makes it the best in the long term by providing a higher level of talent.

The "pac16" has bigger markets, more money and more talent than everyone else.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#17
#17
The state is. I'd imagine all their college football teams are financially self-sufficient.

Assuming the tv deal would be structures in the mold of the big ten network, th proposed conference would have had an overwhelming majority of major tv markets. La, SFO, Seattle, Portland, Denver, salt lake, Dallas, possibly Houston. Look at the way the big tens deal is structured and you will know why a PAC-16 could get a staggering tv contract.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#19
#19
Wouldn't that put them at $4mil or so per year in ticket revenue alone? Add another couple mil from TV, boosters, etc., and you've got a program that can at least recoup expenses. That's all I meant by financially self-sufficient.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top