Boise and 3 others to the Pac 12.

[ASUTodd]

MWC can backfill with UTEP/NMSU from Conference USA. And then I can see them adding the Montana’s and possibly the Dakota’s. Would be a formidable conference. CUSA likely doesn’t need to replace the two they lose.

What concerns me is the current playoff format 5+7. PAC12, while maybe power in name only, will likely add UNLV & Airforce to get to 8, retain their automatic CFP bid, and shut the door on a G5 spot in the CFP.

Remarkable how close our G5 is about to look to what was 2000-ish level FCS.

I have my doubts that the new PAC gets back that autonomous tag with this new lineup.

This could change, but I heard a discussion on SXM College Sports recently that the Pac-12 still has the P designation and that they had two years to come up with something. If that is true, then they will still be a P, even though the others may not like it.

I would think this would be the only real draw for a team like Boise. They now could have a P5 invite in a conference they could win. Smart move if true.

[Saint3333]

Another outcome is the PAC12 brings in Texas St., UTSA, Tulane and Memphis and adds Nevada and UNLV from the MWC which really screws things up. That would be the best G5 conference and defacto 5th playoff spot.

Both the AAC and SBC react trying to get 2-4 members from the other to solidify themselves as the 2nd best G5.

There will be quite a few MWC on an island at that point, but if the PAC doesn't add enough of them then they go after Montana, Montana St, NDSU, and SDSU.

[biggie]

Assume we'll be down to group of 4 soon.

Are you assuming that the MWC members get absorbed by others and dissolve?

Yeah was thinking they get absorbed or it starts a domino of other schools moving to MWC and another G5 gets dissolved.

[appst89]

MWC can backfill with UTEP/NMSU from Conference USA. And then I can see them adding the Montana’s and possibly the Dakota’s. Would be a formidable conference. CUSA likely doesn’t need to replace the two they lose.

What concerns me is the current playoff format 5+7. PAC12, while maybe power in name only, will likely add UNLV & Airforce to get to 8, retain their automatic CFP bid, and shut the door on a G5 spot in the CFP.

Remarkable how close our G5 is about to look to what was 2000-ish level FCS.

I have my doubts that the new PAC gets back that autonomous tag with this new lineup.

This could change, but I heard a discussion on SXM College Sports recently that the Pac-12 still has the P designation and that they had two years to come up with something. If that is true, then they will still be a P, even though the others may not like it.

I would think this would be the only real draw for a team like Boise. They now could have a P5 invite in a conference they could win. Smart move if true.

It's the only thing that makes it make any sense. There's no reason for those four schools to leave the MWC otherwise.

[Saint3333]

Future PAC:
Washington St.
Oregon St.
Fresno St.
San Diego St.
Boise St.
Colorado St.
Memphis
Tulane
UTSA
UNT
Texas St.
USF or UAB

Sets up 6 in the west, 6 in the "east".

If this happens the AAC will look to pick off SBC members.

[311neers]

Future PAC:
Washington St.
Oregon St.
Fresno St.
San Diego St.
Boise St.
Colorado St.
Memphis
Tulane
UTSA
UNT
Texas St.
USF or UAB

Sets up 6 in the west, 6 in the "east".

If this happens the AAC will look to pick off SBC members.

I think they'd go after UNLV, Nevada, Utah State and Wyo before heading east. There are enough teams out west they could add before dipping east.

[Saint3333]

If I'm the PAC I go for a death blow and secure their spot as the top G5 and create a gap.

[kornegaylw]

Future PAC:
Washington St.
Oregon St.
Fresno St.
San Diego St.
Boise St.
Colorado St.
Memphis
Tulane
UTSA
UNT
Texas St.
USF or UAB

Sets up 6 in the west, 6 in the "east".

If this happens the AAC will look to pick off SBC members.

This is how I see it...

Washington St. --> PAC12
Oregon St. --> PAC12
Fresno St. --> PAC12
San Diego St. --> PAC12
Boise St. --> PAC12
Colorado St.[/b] --> PAC12
Memphis --> BIG12
Tulane --> SBC
UTSA --> SBC
UNT --> SBC
Texas St. --> SBC
USF --> BIG12 or SBC
UAB --> SBC

[ah59396]

Future PAC:
Washington St.
Oregon St.
Fresno St.
San Diego St.
Boise St.
Colorado St.
Memphis
Tulane
UTSA
UNT
Texas St.
USF or UAB

Sets up 6 in the west, 6 in the "east".

If this happens the AAC will look to pick off SBC members.

We are going to end up in a zombie AAC that’s a ghost of CUSA 2013.


Marshall
App
ECU
UAB
Southern Miss
Tulsa
Rice
UTEP
La Tech
FAU
MTSU
WKU

[kornegaylw]

Since we're talking about it....Geographically speaking the SBC and AAC should make this trade

SBC gets Army, Navy, UNCC, ECU & Temple
AAC gets ULM, TXST, ULL, ArkSt & S Alabama

Then the SBC & AAC raid CUSA like this

- SBC gets Liberty MTSU & FIU, JxSt, Kennesaw St,
- AAC gets UTEP, LTECH, NMST, SHST, SHST

WKU goes to the MAC....Only b/c I don't want that red blob thing anywhere near Kidd Brewer Stadium

[AppSt94]

MWC can backfill with UTEP/NMSU from Conference USA. And then I can see them adding the Montana’s and possibly the Dakota’s. Would be a formidable conference. CUSA likely doesn’t need to replace the two they lose.

What concerns me is the current playoff format 5+7. PAC12, while maybe power in name only, will likely add UNLV & Airforce to get to 8, retain their automatic CFP bid, and shut the door on a G5 spot in the CFP.

Remarkable how close our G5 is about to look to what was 2000-ish level FCS.

I have my doubts that the new PAC gets back that autonomous tag with this new lineup.

This could change, but I heard a discussion on SXM College Sports recently that the Pac-12 still has the P designation and that they had two years to come up with something. If that is true, then they will still be a P, even though the others may not like it.

What is the criteria to remain a “Power” conference? I think that it could be a very good conference, but putting a BMW logo on a Ford doesn’t make it a BMW.

[Mjohn1988]

MWC can backfill with UTEP/NMSU from Conference USA. And then I can see them adding the Montana’s and possibly the Dakota’s. Would be a formidable conference. CUSA likely doesn’t need to replace the two they lose.

What concerns me is the current playoff format 5+7. PAC12, while maybe power in name only, will likely add UNLV & Airforce to get to 8, retain their automatic CFP bid, and shut the door on a G5 spot in the CFP.

Remarkable how close our G5 is about to look to what was 2000-ish level FCS.

I have my doubts that the new PAC gets back that autonomous tag with this new lineup.

This could change, but I heard a discussion on SXM College Sports recently that the Pac-12 still has the P designation and that they had two years to come up with something. If that is true, then they will still be a P, even though the others may not like it.

What is the criteria to remain a “Power” conference? I think that it could be a very good conference, but putting a BMW logo on a Ford doesn’t make it a BMW.

Not sure if you’ll get this but I work on cars so here goes. Putting a BMW logo on a Ford would mean you could have a BMW that you could actually drive and not have a multiple warning lights on the dash all the time.

[BeauFoster]

If we do end up in a re-factored AAC, at least we will have a guaranteed win on the calendar each season against UNCC

[AppSt94]

MWC can backfill with UTEP/NMSU from Conference USA. And then I can see them adding the Montana’s and possibly the Dakota’s. Would be a formidable conference. CUSA likely doesn’t need to replace the two they lose.

What concerns me is the current playoff format 5+7. PAC12, while maybe power in name only, will likely add UNLV & Airforce to get to 8, retain their automatic CFP bid, and shut the door on a G5 spot in the CFP.

Remarkable how close our G5 is about to look to what was 2000-ish level FCS.

I have my doubts that the new PAC gets back that autonomous tag with this new lineup.

This could change, but I heard a discussion on SXM College Sports recently that the Pac-12 still has the P designation and that they had two years to come up with something. If that is true, then they will still be a P, even though the others may not like it.

What is the criteria to remain a “Power” conference? I think that it could be a very good conference, but putting a BMW logo on a Ford doesn’t make it a BMW.

Not sure if you’ll get this but I work on cars so here goes. Putting a BMW logo on a Ford would mean you could have a BMW that you could actually drive and not have a multiple warning lights on the dash all the time.

Isn’t that what blackout tape is for?

[BeauFoster]

MWC can backfill with UTEP/NMSU from Conference USA. And then I can see them adding the Montana’s and possibly the Dakota’s. Would be a formidable conference. CUSA likely doesn’t need to replace the two they lose.

What concerns me is the current playoff format 5+7. PAC12, while maybe power in name only, will likely add UNLV & Airforce to get to 8, retain their automatic CFP bid, and shut the door on a G5 spot in the CFP.

Remarkable how close our G5 is about to look to what was 2000-ish level FCS.

I have my doubts that the new PAC gets back that autonomous tag with this new lineup.

This could change, but I heard a discussion on SXM College Sports recently that the Pac-12 still has the P designation and that they had two years to come up with something. If that is true, then they will still be a P, even though the others may not like it.

What is the criteria to remain a “Power” conference? I think that it could be a very good conference, but putting a BMW logo on a Ford doesn’t make it a BMW.

Not sure if you’ll get this but I work on cars so here goes. Putting a BMW logo on a Ford would mean you could have a BMW that you could actually drive and not have a multiple warning lights on the dash all the time.

I have had way more issues with the Fords I’ve owned vs the BMWs. My last Exploder had 11 recalls in 20 months.

[t4pizza]

Future PAC:
Washington St.
Oregon St.
Fresno St.
San Diego St.
Boise St.
Colorado St.
Memphis
Tulane
UTSA
UNT
Texas St.
USF or UAB

Sets up 6 in the west, 6 in the "east".

If this happens the AAC will look to pick off SBC members.

This is how I see it...

Washington St. --> PAC12
Oregon St. --> PAC12
Fresno St. --> PAC12
San Diego St. --> PAC12
Boise St. --> PAC12
Colorado St.[/b] --> PAC12
Memphis --> BIG12
Tulane --> SBC
UTSA --> SBC
UNT --> SBC
Texas St. --> SBC
USF --> BIG12 or SBC
UAB --> SBC

Damn, that is going to be one big ass Sun Belt Conference with 4-5 additional teams.

[AppSt94]

I have my doubts that the new PAC gets back that autonomous tag with this new lineup.

This could change, but I heard a discussion on SXM College Sports recently that the Pac-12 still has the P designation and that they had two years to come up with something. If that is true, then they will still be a P, even though the others may not like it.

What is the criteria to remain a “Power” conference? I think that it could be a very good conference, but putting a BMW logo on a Ford doesn’t make it a BMW.

Not sure if you’ll get this but I work on cars so here goes. Putting a BMW logo on a Ford would mean you could have a BMW that you could actually drive and not have a multiple warning lights on the dash all the time.

I have had way more issues with the Fords I’ve owned vs the BMWs. My last Exploder had 11 recalls in 20 months.

I am so glad that I didn’t use my other option to reference this new conference.

[kornegaylw]

Future PAC:
Washington St.
Oregon St.
Fresno St.
San Diego St.
Boise St.
Colorado St.
Memphis
Tulane
UTSA
UNT
Texas St.
USF or UAB

Sets up 6 in the west, 6 in the "east".

If this happens the AAC will look to pick off SBC members.

This is how I see it...

Washington St. --> PAC12
Oregon St. --> PAC12
Fresno St. --> PAC12
San Diego St. --> PAC12
Boise St. --> PAC12
Colorado St.[/b] --> PAC12
Memphis --> BIG12
Tulane --> SBC
UTSA --> SBC
UNT --> SBC
Texas St. --> SBC
USF --> BIG12 or SBC
UAB --> SBC

Damn, that is going to be one big ass Sun Belt Conference with 4-5 additional teams.

BIG10 is 18 teams...That would make SBC 20 teams...

That said I don't see all the SBC teams wanting to stay in the SBC...I see the Texas teams wanting to be in a more regionally based conference

[rbarthle17]

This is a nothing burger to me. None of them are marquee programs. They won't be considered a true power conference by those that move the money. It may be a small boost to those mountain west teams, but in the coming years they will be relegated to the G5(6) level. I'd be extremely surprised if they can weasel an auto bid. This won't be landscape shifting like when the pac12 broke up.

They already have an auto bid, this conference will have that 5th conference champion spot basically on lockdown. This is hardly a nothing burger. On the good side this gets rid of Liberty embarrassing the G5 on a large stage anymore.

We have exactly 2 years now to get a playoff spot, after that it's going to be nigh on unachievable.

[Mjohn1988]

I would love to see the G5 conferences forget about the whole playoff system and break into true regional conferences. It may not work but I think it’s the best play the G5 can make. I think there is a real chance that people would move away from some of the P4 hype and really enjoy regional games.

App
CCU
JMU
Marshall
UNCC
ECU
ODU
Liberty
Wake … maybe if the ACC goes away
GSU
G-State