We will know once everything settles in. Most PAC fans are super happy with the move so far. Actually a lot of people thought it was a good move.
It will be a better deal for them financially. They will cut out a lot of fat financially and with competition.
Will it be marginal? Maybe. But it will be a better league.
You’re right… a lot to be settled. I’m sure the “PAC” fans are happy… they feel like they’re somehow in the “cool kids” club, which just isn’t the case. They finally got invited to the party, paid the cover charge, and found out that there’s no chics there, and now their rationalizing.
As far as cutting out fat goes… they started out a solid 6 teams with good markets (compared to the MW)… then they added Utah State (who doesn’t move the needle media market wise) and have to add another still to even be a conference. Then they give Gonzaga a full share and I think I read something where teams get to keep their NCAA tourney credits as well.
So from a standpoint of cutting fat, I’m not so sure they have.
You had your original 6 and let’s just say they were all going to be pulling relatively equal weight… obviously you have Boise at the top and CSU at the bottom, but on balance you feel that everyone is equal.
Then you add Utah State… are they really more of a draw than Wyoming, UNM, or UNR? I’d say not by any measurable amount during any five year stretch. So I’d say you just diluted your conference by about 15%.
Then you add Gonzaga… good move, but at what price? When football accounts for 80% of media valuation, does Gonzaga’s value in basketball make up for not playing football? And if it is true that they’d get to keep their NCAA credits or at least the lion share, then hasn’t that diluted your per team distributions even more? It’s kind of a wild card but I’d suspect it ends up costing them all on a per team distribution level.
Now add your 8th team… there’s nobody left and whoever it is will be a much larger drag than any lower tier MW team has been.
So now 25% of your teams in football
