Loyal Coug1 said:

I like your post, but if you think this: "I'm sure the PAC teams and president know exactly what each MW teams brings to the table financially." then I think you terribly overestimate the stooges that are in the current administration of WSU, The Pac-2 offices and probably OSU.

The more we go round and round and the clock keeps ticking, the more of a no-brainer it is to do the PacMtn-14 full merger. The MW is surviving just fine, arguably (or maybe there is no argument) the best G5 conference. Your revenue is much higher than the AAC, and way higher than the others G5's. The Pac-2 represents the strongest addition that is out there. We have discussed the financial issues with us just joining you (our loss of BB money, being unable to rid yourselves of the BSU premium, etc.) The reverse merger fixes all that. MW schools will overall keep their NCAA and other money, BSU's premium goes away. Pac-2 keeps their money. The P5 ship has sailed for the Pac-2. All we are doing by sitting on our hands is frittering away our money and losing media and NCAA money. The WCC scheduling arrangement was stupid and will cost us. We end up with by far the best G5 conference, we structure in flexibility (as in low exit fees) to allow for future opportunities (that are unlikely to happen), and we have a nice stable conference with only 2 time zones and a lot of nearby schools, which you already enjoy and the Pac-2 would enhance.

Why is this so incomprehensible to some? As paraphrased on my home site - do you grab the nice, cute drunk girl at the bar and take her home, or do you hold out for the hot chick that you probably have no chance at? My vote? The former. My dipshit Cougar brethren? The latter.

Click to expand...

Hey I don't want to underplay the ineptitude of the PAC over the years. There has been some questionable decisions no doubt. Some of those decisions were because the inevitable was going to happen ( teams leaving for greener pastures) and there wasn't much that the commish or the other teams could do about it.

But come on, you don't think the PAC 2 and thier commish has any idea what the worth of these schools are? Once USC and UCLA announced they were leaving, and probably before that, the PAC has been looking at all possible expansion targets, and they got this close to adding SDSU. They have had discussions with all of the major and non major TV/streaming providers for the next media contract.

And then in the past year where everyone bailed, you don't think that the PAC 2 and the new commish has not been trying to exhaust every opportunity on what to do next? They haven' talked to any media partners about scenarios and worth in the past year? They have had multiple discussions with the MW themselves, you don't think they talked about markets and realistic expectations on contracts?

They know exactly their own worth and what every school in the region, and perhaps every school west of the Mississippi and Tulane (that isn't P4 right now) brings to the table.

As for the MW "doing fine" sure they are, especially competitively. But the AAC and the freaking Sunbelt both have better media contracts right now, and they almost both have the MW doubled ( not sure of the AAC since they lost more teams).


It may not be 100% about money, but it is 98% about money. I don't think the PAC 2 to willingly take a 50% paycut on their annual TV deal just because the MW is "doing fine".

Clock is ticking, but it sure looks like they have had a plan for a while. Stay the PAC 2 , play football with the MW and other sports with the WCC then start the new PAC in 2026 where they can potentially get the top MW teams/markets with little to no fees.

reblife702 said:

What is your prediction?

Click to expand...

One of the others, but I'd LOVE to be wrong!

Login to view embedded media
Episode 5 lightsaber fighting is 25X better than what I saw in the sequel trilogy..

I know the series is pretty bad but this magical dog shit picked up.

Masked_rebel said:

in exchange they will try and poach traditional ACC schools like Maryland, Rutgers,

Click to expand...

I glossed over there. No chance Rutgers or Maryland would consider leaving Big Ten, right? It's like $20mil per school less in the ACC currently, isn't it?

Masked_rebel said:

The ACC isn't going anywhere... it's to expensive for the teams to exit and in exchange they will try and poach traditional ACC schools like Maryland, Rutgers, and add a school like WVU and Central Florida.. again, if anything there will be a redistribution of schools that get traded. It's in their best interests to keep 4 power conferences, having 2 20+ team conferences doesn't make sense and would competitively suck and if that's the case, they'd simply get rid of NCAA and form their own league

Click to expand...

That 2036 GOR is a pretty tough look (unless it gets worked out in court that teams can leave at a fraction of the cost). ACC *should* be stable. Enough regionality and "non-dominant" schools, they should be okay with 2-4 leave. Do FSU and Clemson break the camels back? How about UNC? Miami? NC State? Wake?

Your point remains true. If there are 6-7 that stay committed, just grab WVU, UCF, UConn. Beyond that, I can't think of anyone who would add value. I'm not convinced that UCF or WVU do. But the ACC nucleus *should* be solid. NC State, Wake, BC, Georgia Tech, V-Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville. I don't feel like they are threat to leave. Maaaaybe Louisville. Maybe.

dcut03 said:

They don't need UNLV to get Vegas.

Click to expand...

This is something I think people forget. No conference needs UNLV to own the Vegas market. If UNLV has sustained success, then gets invited to a better spot, it comes with new fans. But as is, 3 of the P4 can claim sovereignty over Las Vegas. The Big 10 because of the two LA schools. The Big 12 because of the Arizona schools and the Utah schools, therefore influence by relevance. The SEC owns any major city where they put two of its teams.


Just to divert pack to the concept of a Pac 8... I think I quite like it for (or even a Pac 9, since we are already beyond full regionality due to there not being enough teams in this part of the US, and also since divisions aren't require for conference title game)... Full football round robin, equal and complete scheduling... which you could do with 10, but does it really matter? Pac 8-10 it's doable. Ya know what? Sign me up.

WSU and OSU
BSU and Fresno
UNLV and SDSU
CSU and USU

Then determine with TV partner guidance whether or not it's worth bringing in Wyoming or AFA or 2-4 Texas/Louisiana/elsewhere (Really only UTSA, Tulane, Memphis... maybe a Texas State if you get UTSA... San Marcos and San Antonio are an hour apart, I think that's huge to give them a natural regional rival... they have never shared a conference, at least not in D1A.... Texas State was decent last year, but has been mostly bad in recent history. Like 2-4 wins. They are probably too much dead weight currently.)

...stream of consciousness typing.... Anyway, uhhh... UNLV not needed for Vegas market, and give the Pac 8 a thought...

The ACC isn't going anywhere... it's to expensive for the teams to exit and in exchange they will try and poach traditional ACC schools like Maryland, Rutgers, and add a school like WVU and Central Florida.. again, if anything there will be a redistribution of schools that get traded. It's in their best interests to keep 4 power conferences, having 2 20+ team conferences doesn't make sense and would competitively suck and if that's the case, they'd simply get rid of NCAA and form their own league

TimothyC3 said:

I don’t feel it’s just about the money, which is always very important. Access to the new football playoffs or tourney is also a factor in my opinion. So what happens to the new 5-7. Model adopted after the PAC imploded if the ACC follows the same fate. Because if Clemson, FSU, North Carolina and a few others leave, will there be a new play off with a 4-8 model? Because at that point the ACC left overs will be no better off than a potential PAC 8 in football and the left over ACC schools and champion won’t deserve an auto bid. How is that issue handled?

Click to expand...

Why should "we" care what happens to the ACC orphans? And no, a leftover P4 ACC will not be equivalent to a G5 filled Pac-8. This Pac-8 BS, started by some dumbshit on Twitter, does not deserve any discussion. Derision maybe.

I don’t feel it’s just about the money, which is always very important. Access to the new football playoffs or tourney is also a factor in my opinion. So what happens to the new 5-7. Model adopted after the PAC imploded if the ACC follows the same fate. Because if Clemson, FSU, North Carolina and a few others leave, will there be a new play off with a 4-8 model? Because at that point the ACC left overs will be no better off than a potential PAC 8 in football and the left over ACC schools and champion won’t deserve an auto bid. How is that issue handled?

dcut03 said:

I wonder what it takes to keep the conference going. A rebuilt PAC can be announced and agreed upon as early as next year after 8/2/25. Is that enough? In terms of the NCAA and tournament money, I would imagine that would suffice. Especially if the new league starts by the first football game of 2026.

As for knowing what each team is worth, I'm sure the PAC teams and president know exactly what each MW teams brings to the table financially. They have been talking to TV people for several years, and they have been looking at MW as possible expansion candidates for the old pac 12 for a while.

As for bringing everyone together and hashing this out? Not going to happen. Gloria has to protect the whole conference, or at least appear to do so. Also people aren't going to look at Wyoming's prez and say, your TV numbers aren't good enough. This is all about money, but outward facing apparently it is poor taste to say that out loud.

Actually having 6 teams leave is better for the survival of the MW. They will have some remaining decent football and basketball teams to rebuild from. They will keep NCAAT revenue, they will be able to add some teams to stay afloat. Their revenue will drop so that sucks.

Click to expand...

I like your post, but if you think this: "I'm sure the PAC teams and president know exactly what each MW teams brings to the table financially." then I think you terribly overestimate the stooges that are in the current administration of WSU, The Pac-2 offices and probably OSU.

The more we go round and round and the clock keeps ticking, the more of a no-brainer it is to do the PacMtn-14 full merger. The MW is surviving just fine, arguably (or maybe there is no argument) the best G5 conference. Your revenue is much higher than the AAC, and way higher than the others G5's. The Pac-2 represents the strongest addition that is out there. We have discussed the financial issues with us just joining you (our loss of BB money, being unable to rid yourselves of the BSU premium, etc.) The reverse merger fixes all that. MW schools will overall keep their NCAA and other money, BSU's premium goes away. Pac-2 keeps their money. The P5 ship has sailed for the Pac-2. All we are doing by sitting on our hands is frittering away our money and losing media and NCAA money. The WCC scheduling arrangement was stupid and will cost us. We end up with by far the best G5 conference, we structure in flexibility (as in low exit fees) to allow for future opportunities (that are unlikely to happen), and we have a nice stable conference with only 2 time zones and a lot of nearby schools, which you already enjoy and the Pac-2 would enhance.

Why is this so incomprehensible to some? As paraphrased on my home site - do you grab the nice, cute drunk girl at the bar and take her home, or do you hold out for the hot chick that you probably have no chance at? My vote? The former. My dipshit Cougar brethren? The latter.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

Login to view embedded media
I think you guys will enjoy this.

reblife702 said:

In our short time on X it has looked like there are quite a lot of disagreements in the community on sports topics and takes, but some of the exchanges seem very personal? We are not insiders there nor are we a hundred percent tuned into the basketball side of things. It seems like a lot of personal shots come out and arguments begin when basketball is discussed. We saw a discussion about Coach Odom getting a statue here in the future and some people freaked out. Can anyone break it down?

Click to expand...

I haven't seen any statue conversation other than in jest. I also have not looked for any... but my thoughts.

If Odom is out after 2 years of success, obviously any conversation of a statue is moot in my opinion. For Tark, it took 20+ years after he was removed from the school of having 20 years of sustained success and 8-10 years of top tier success, and a few years of unmatched national prominence.

To me, statues have to come with time. 2-3 years sustained success in fb at a school like UNLV should get notoriety. To be honest, it would have to be like 10 years of never being below 7-8 wins, and multiple years of 10+ wins in that window, nationally ranked, and something that he commits to long term. 5 years, even if there is a national top 25 ranking, probably doesn't do it, unless they get into the playoff. Then conversation comes.

I haven't thought this out much. But it has to be high achievement over a period of time.

Rebel Hoya said:

That’s after the fact that UNLV did not do enough to earn an NIT bid without several more deserving schools dropping out of consideration for a tournament of ever dissolving credibility and prestige.

The consistency is the problem and that could be due to many reasons related back to coaching, motivation, and preparation.

Click to expand...

The vast majority, not all, of those that declined were autobids for power conferences. It's not like the best remaining teams all declined then they got to us. Just the highest rated Power schools.
Last season was the first season where the highest rated 2 schools left out of the NCAA were automatically given bids from each power conference to the NIT. They were also gauranteed home games. Most of those were not rated higher than UNLV overall.

1Tripoda said:

Let's talk about that game against Seton Hall during our NIT tournament. UNLV did managed to win two games against teams that are supposedly ranked higher. UNLV was unranked while getting in. UNLV beat Princeton and BC. But then got thrashed by Seton Hall. Look at that Seton Hall team make up. Most of them New Yorkers plays in NY. They won the tournament. That is just psychologically. Physically, those guys looks like they are matured while UNLV played with a pump freshman PG who was supposed to be a HS senior. That is all I can muster to support CKK.

Click to expand...

That’s after the fact that UNLV did not do enough to earn an NIT bid without several more deserving schools dropping out of consideration for a tournament of ever dissolving credibility and prestige.

The consistency is the problem and that could be due to many reasons related back to coaching, motivation, and preparation.

Just buy reasonable upper tier seats and move down.
It costs about $200.00 for two seats.
You will get at least $200.00 worth of enjoyment during the season
May not $300.00 but $200.00 for sure.

bcvegaspt said:

Login to view embedded media
Whether or not we attend, at least we are getting invited to the party.

I don’t think that we will win this recruiting battle but how great is it to be in the mix for this level of player? Maybe we become a transfer option.

Click to expand...

What is your prediction?

Rebel1986 said:

I am not sure why you do not think UNLV can win the recruiting battle considering UNLV has already been beating those schools and many other high level programs in the recruiting war for 2025 (based on Rivals list of programs that have made offers). The following is a quick list of mostly higher level programs and how many times UNLV has won recruiting battles with the programs, which shows UNLV can hold their own in recruiting:

(currently UNLV is ranked 58th with 12 recruits which put them in a tie with California with 13 recruits, ahead of Utah who are ranked 62nd with 11 recruits, and behind Kansas with 14 recruits ranked 43rd. The average rating for Kansas is 2.86, the average for California is 2.92, the average for Utah is 3.18, and the average for UNLV is 2.92).

Arizona 4
Arizona State 1
Arkansas 3
Auburn 1
Boston College 3
BYU 2
Cal 1
Colorado 1
Duke 1
Florida Atlantic 1
Fresno State 1
Hawaii 2
Indiana 1
Iowa State 3
Houston 1
Kansas 2
Kansas State 1
Louisville 4
Maryland 2
Memphis 3
Miami 1
Michigan 3
Michigan State 1
Mississippi 1
Missouri 1
Nebraska 2
North Carolina 1
North Texas 2
Oklahoma 2
Oregon 2
Oregon State 1
Penn State 2
Purdue 1
Stanford 1
Tennessee 1
Texas A&M 3
Texas Tech 1
Tulsa 2
UAB 1
Utah 1
UTSA 4
Vanderbilt 1
Virginia Tech 1
Washington 1
Washington State 1
West Virginia 1
Wisconsin 1

Click to expand...

I saw Rivals listed Jon Grimmet (TE) and Yasir Muhammed (ATH) also committed

Might want to keep an eye on this kid too. Texas HS leader interceptions

Login to view embedded media

Players want to play for exciting systems. Look at 2 of those 4 teams and their offensive capabilities... UNLV will show his skills off, same with KU... Its not always P4 and cash for some of these guys.

bcvegaspt said:

Login to view embedded media
Whether or not we attend, at least we are getting invited to the party.

I don’t think that we will win this recruiting battle but how great is it to be in the mix for this level of player? Maybe we become a transfer option.

Click to expand...

I am not sure why you do not think UNLV can win the recruiting battle considering UNLV has already been beating those schools and many other high level programs in the recruiting war for 2025 (based on Rivals list of programs that have made offers). The following is a quick list of mostly higher level programs and how many times UNLV has won recruiting battles with the programs, which shows UNLV can hold their own in recruiting:

(currently UNLV is ranked 58th with 12 recruits which put them in a tie with California with 13 recruits, ahead of Utah who are ranked 62nd with 11 recruits, and behind Kansas with 14 recruits ranked 43rd. The average rating for Kansas is 2.86, the average for California is 2.92, the average for Utah is 3.18, and the average for UNLV is 2.92).

Arizona 4
Arizona State 1
Arkansas 3
Auburn 1
Boston College 3
BYU 2
Cal 1
Colorado 1
Duke 1
Florida Atlantic 1
Fresno State 1
Hawaii 2
Indiana 1
Iowa State 3
Houston 1
Kansas 2
Kansas State 1
Louisville 4
Maryland 2
Memphis 3
Miami 1
Michigan 3
Michigan State 1
Mississippi 1
Missouri 1
Nebraska 2
North Carolina 1
North Texas 2
Oklahoma 2
Oregon 2
Oregon State 1
Penn State 2
Purdue 1
Stanford 1
Tennessee 1
Texas A&M 3
Texas Tech 1
Tulsa 2
UAB 1
Utah 1
UTSA 4
Vanderbilt 1
Virginia Tech 1
Washington 1
Washington State 1
West Virginia 1
Wisconsin 1

dcut03 said:

I wonder what it takes to keep the conference going. A rebuilt PAC can be announced and agreed upon as early as next yet after 8/2/25. Is that enough? In terms of the NCAA and tournament money, I would imagine that would suffice. Especially if the new league starts by the first football game of 2026.

As for knowing what each team is worth, I'm sure the PAC teams and president know exactly what each MW teams brings to the table financially. They have been talking to TV people for several years, and tey have been looking at MW as possible expansion candidates for the old pac 12 for a while.

As for bringing everyone together and hashing this out? Not going to happen. Gloria has to protect the whole conference, or at least appear to do so. Also people aren't going to look at Wyoming's prez and say, your TV numbers aren't good enough. This is all about money, but outward facing apparently it is poor taste to say that out loud.

Actually having 6 teams leave is better for the survival of the MW. They will have some remaining decent football and basketball teams to rebuild from. They will keep NCAAT revenue, they will be able to add some teams to stay afloat. Their revenue will drop so that sucks.

Click to expand...

Agee I think it will be better if there is 2 western conferences versus one. MW would not be done. Can add UTEP, New Mexico St, Montana, Montana St. North Dakota St and South Dakota st. Maybe Grand Canyon for Basketball. There’s options.

Can see new PAC and MW come up with scheduling agreements to keep rivalries in place.

TimothyC3 said:

I feel you are on to something here. Why wait two years and play the MWC in a scheduling agreement in football if the plan is a reverse merger? Makes no sense. Barring a Big 12 invite (not going to happen) this appears to be the PAC ‘s best option. Go lean with more $$$ per school and wait for more fall out. Also, what ever course the PAC 2 takes it will include the advice of the TV executives as to the value of the TV contract.

Click to expand...

Loyal Coug1 said:

6/30/26 (or maybe 7/1/26). But there again, our $30M in future NCAA BB money is at risk here. Otherwise we already don't really have a conference.

Click to expand...

Loyal Coug1 said:

What we need, which will never happen because this isn't how things are done, is to get all the MW and Pac-2 reps (prez's or AD's whatever) in a room with Gloria and our lame ass Commissioner Teresa Gould, and lay all the cards on the table. No conversation or option is sacred. What does the money look like on both sides, poaching and exit penalties, NCAA allocations, media rights current and imagined, bowl tie-ins, attendance, eyeballs on TV's, etc. No F-ing lawyers, media or anyone else.

No backdoor or airport shenanigans.

Welcome to Fantasy Island. Da Plane, da Plane!!!

Click to expand...

I wonder what it takes to keep the conference going. A rebuilt PAC can be announced and agreed upon as early as next year after 8/2/25. Is that enough? In terms of the NCAA and tournament money, I would imagine that would suffice. Especially if the new league starts by the first football game of 2026.

As for knowing what each team is worth, I'm sure the PAC teams and president know exactly what each MW teams brings to the table financially. They have been talking to TV people for several years, and they have been looking at MW as possible expansion candidates for the old pac 12 for a while.

As for bringing everyone together and hashing this out? Not going to happen. Gloria has to protect the whole conference, or at least appear to do so. Also people aren't going to look at Wyoming's prez and say, your TV numbers aren't good enough. This is all about money, but outward facing apparently it is poor taste to say that out loud.

Actually having 6 teams leave is better for the survival of the MW. They will have some remaining decent football and basketball teams to rebuild from. They will keep NCAAT revenue, they will be able to add some teams to stay afloat. Their revenue will drop so that sucks.

ACC is not going to merge with new PAC/MW. They have plenty of teams in the east they can add. UConn, Memphis, South Florida, Tulane.

You don’t need 12 teams for championship game anymore.

It’s a no brainer for the top half of the Mountain West to break away. They have over 25k fans in the seats for football games, markets and/or brands. Which provides more value and less team to divide it up with.

The lower half average about 15k a game for football and/or don’t have a market. Wyoming has a good football program and New Mexico has a market. Utah state just wins. They would be the next up if Washington state and Oregon State move on in the future.

Agree on Big 12 being our best possible spot in the future. Both football and basketball have to able to compete consistently. Think the first step is a new PAC.