I am still, up in the air on this one. I will just wait and see how this plays out. Thoughts?
A Bad deal for UNLV? Or, a Good deal for UNLV's future.
- Thread starter WYNN or Dye
- Start date
Yea, Texas St? Congrats to them. As New Mexico, would have been a better add than Texas St.
Yea I’m not sure how adding TxSt increases the nPac’s value. If UNLV can keep winning and compete for a MWCC and CFP spot over the next 5 years, we’ll definitely be in a better position for a potential B12 invite than we would if we chose to jump to the P12.
It simply doesn't.
There is a reason it took this long to add an 8th, they were looking at other options. TxState is a last resort.
And before everyone laughs at them, Texas State turned the MW down.
They have potential, for sure. But they aren't worth much right now. Their positives on paper are currently fools gold. Yes they have a large enrollment and alumni base, but I have yet to find anyone who went to Texas State that cared about their athletics and I live in Texas. Even Tx State athletes that I have treated aren't super gung ho about their school. I have met countless Tx State grads, but they do not follow their sports, 90% are UT fans and could not get in to Texas so they went to the closest school they could geographically.
Now does the PAC brand change that? Honestly, I think it could. Being in a bad conference did hurt their perception and the PAC, though still G6 is still an upgrade. But it will still take time.
As for UNLV staying vs going? I don't think we will truly know until we see all of the specifics. Specifics on the mediation, what the new MW deal will be, if the PAC is truly offering a p4 free pass like they said.
If the MW "wins" mediation, gets near or all of the poaching fees and settles at 11 or 12 mill per school on exit fees ( the high end of industry standard) then UNLV staying put could be more financially rewarding. At least temporarily.
But if the poaching fees are dropped or severely reduced and the exit fees are negotiated to 7-8 mill per team ( the lower end of the industry standard), and in fact they do have that same free pass, then I think UNLV made a mistake. It looks to me right now that the PAC teams will easily make double of the MW teams per year (and that is just the base money), I think the PAC would easily pay our exit fees straight up if it meant that they didn't have to resort to Texas State. The PAC would make more money, have a much stronger SOS, and will net more bonus money. From sharing of CFP, to easily 2-3 times more NCAAT credits, even if we would only get a 1/2 share if UNLV didn't make the tourney. More likely to get at least 1/2 of the G5 CFP money, etc.
One thing that I think might be true, is that the Big 12 may have recommended that we stay put.
Some uncertainty with the PAC, especially with the free pass. Also we all know that Vegas likes winners, so the big fish/small pond approach could be the easier path to maintain a certain level of relevance. We may have a tougher path to the CFP in terms of winning ties with a PAC champ, but we will more likely have conference championships. And we will at least likely stay in the conversation, or at least have a good chance to do so.
It really is the only thing that makes sense to me. Not that UNLV is staying, per se, it is just that we didn't do anything to have the PAC and MW fight it out for us. We signed the GOR way earlier than I think was necessary, locking us is essentially to the MW or B12 essentially. Why do that unless it was at least recommended by the B12?
Some uncertainty with the PAC, especially with the free pass. Also we all know that Vegas likes winners, so the big fish/small pond approach could be the easier path to maintain a certain level of relevance. We may have a tougher path to the CFP in terms of winning ties with a PAC champ, but we will more likely have conference championships. And we will at least likely stay in the conversation, or at least have a good chance to do so.
It really is the only thing that makes sense to me. Not that UNLV is staying, per se, it is just that we didn't do anything to have the PAC and MW fight it out for us. We signed the GOR way earlier than I think was necessary, locking us is essentially to the MW or B12 essentially. Why do that unless it was at least recommended by the B12?
I think thats because they wanted the Pac 12 invite all along and played it into a significant increase in media share...
Pac 12 wasnt/isnt willing to pay exit fees. They are loaning the money to their new invitees, not covering the costs from their coffers. The only fee they're really concerned about is the poaching agreement because that comes out of their pockets directly. They didnt think they needed to pay exit fees for programs which is why Tulane and Memphis both said no thanks. All the programs entering the Pac will be without probably 2 years worth of $$ distribution. With the House settlement opening up thats a huge chunk of cash that could significantly hurt the competitive sides of CSU/SDSU/Fresno even though theyve all committed to participating. Even if UNLV makes less money per season, in intermediate future, theyre well positioned for being competitive and striving for that P4 invite, which has always been the target.
My biggest issue on UNLV staying is taking a percentage of anything VS making Gloria commit to hard numbers across the board.
They have offered 6 million in the past. Is it a stretch that they would offer the 7-11 that exit fees will likely be negotiated down to?
Take TX state even at a half share, which is double their current worth, or take UNLV that is probably near the mean of their contract right now. That is a lot more money to spread around, nearly 1-2 mil per school per year. a 6 million dollar delta over 6 years is probably worth the 11 million up front costs.
Exactly! They should have put a minimum number that they would be ok with and that way if the money came in to low they would have an out with any legal problem! I just don't understand why they would sign something like this not knowing what the final money number would be! Either they are really stupid or they know that they are leaving for the Big 12 within 5/6 years. That would be the only way that it would make sense to sign such a contract! Supposedly they had multiple conversations with Big 12 before they signed that Grant of Rights with MW. If they were advised to stay put by Yorkman then I understand but if not your taking a big risk! There would be a lot of pressure for mainly football and to a lesser degree basketball to win at a high level, no down years during the 5 years of MW contract!
My biggest issue is signing the GOR that acknowledges that they are OK with any additional funds that come our way, even if it is zero. Why sign such a document WHEN we did. No reason.
Other than perhaps having a guaranteed clean break with the MW and the Big 12 suggested it.
My guess regarding UNLV is that they are betting on themselves being able to get UNLV into the Big12 within the next few years. Now both football and basketball need to hit home runs this year to push the Big 12 to open a spot up.
Because the free pass with the PAC isn't in writing yet. Officially it wasn't in the language when they agreed on terms initially, but since then the MW had that in their cause, and they said they were going to do it too. But again, not in writing. Not sure if that has officially been confirmed with the new media contract or not.
That and I think they want us to be good. If we went with the PAC, there are more opportunities to lose and perhaps lose momentum and even fan support.
Being the big fish in a small pond for a few years. Rack up league titles, still be a Playoff contender and still have a chance to make it if Boise or a PAC winner has too many losses, then I can see that path.
The problem on UNLV side, they will likely be losing money by staying put.
Maybe it is the perception of bailing on a new conference after a few years?
I can see possibly a few reasons, what I don't understand is why UNLV did when they did it if it had nothing to do with the Big 12. Very shortsighted if that is the case and it cost them millions.
I'll be honest I don't think the BIG12 is rooting for or against UNLV. They have expansion options beyond UNLV.
Adding one of USF/Memphis or Tulane to give Cincy/WVU/UCF travel partners.
They could call on SDSU again.
We'll see.
And you are probably right.
They may not be "rooting" for UNLV, but has for sure given feedback on the things that they are looking for. I'm sure that played a big role in their decision making.
Maybe UNLV thinks that being in a weaker conference with more potential to rack up wins, get conference championships, and be in the Playoff discussion THAT way is the better path to keep and raise local interest in the program, essuntially raising our media value, keep national relevance, etc.
That approach has not worked for basketball, but Football is a little different.
If it was purely UNLV's decision, still disappointed. UNLV had 2 conference fighting over them and did not do enough to get the best deal. Instead, as pressure was rising on the PAC side, UNLV literally signed their rights away to the MW agreeing in specific language that it didn't matter that they wouldn't get the money promised, and apparently helped write that very document.
WTF.
Im not trying to be Debbie downer.
But if you are being objective about it..
Big12 is already at 16. 18 would be the next most sensible number and possibly max you might want. Two nine team divisions.
BIG 12 has a few options. Add a couple more schools out West. Or go East to help CINCY, UCF, WVU with Travel. They go East and take Memphis, USF or possibly ECU (Look at their attendance numbers before you discount them)
Expanding out West. Yes I think UNLV would be considered. But the BIG12 has already expressed interest in SDSU and could again. CSU is viable with its facilities and you would lock up the Colorado market. OSU could be an option. Boise is an option.
We can make arguments why we think UNLV might be the better option and there's definitely truth to that but they aren't the only one.
ACC gets gutted. They may stay put initially. They still have some solid brands. They could backfill and stay regional. Memphis, Tulane, USF and ECU all become options. Maybe they look West to help SMU/CAL/Stanford? Sure and UNLV might be in the mix of candidates. But so would SDSU, OSU, WSU...
Do I think UNLV is on some folks short list. Yes. They're just not the only ones.
What I'm getting at is this.
Everybody points to Harper getting the free P4 out clause with the MWC.
Maybe it means something. But it could also be a big nothing burger. A lip service PR move after making a decision that was pretty unpopular at the time.
Who knows.
IMO, this will eventually come down to when the Big 10 and SEC go to 20 teams.
For the expansion they'll go for ND and then the ACC/Big12 for the rest. That is 5 teams that need to be filled from the ACC/BIG 12 for the conference to remain at their current level.
BUT - if they also decide to expand to 20 that makes 5 to backfill and 7 to get from their current max to 20 - total 12.
I believe if it's 5 teams to choose from we should make it. Near certainty if it becomes 12.
For the expansion they'll go for ND and then the ACC/Big12 for the rest. That is 5 teams that need to be filled from the ACC/BIG 12 for the conference to remain at their current level.
BUT - if they also decide to expand to 20 that makes 5 to backfill and 7 to get from their current max to 20 - total 12.
I believe if it's 5 teams to choose from we should make it. Near certainty if it becomes 12.
Also a possibility...Wouldn't be shocked if it played out like that either.
The question then becomes will all the $$ go the the SEC/Big super conference?
Well yeah. But there will be enough trickle down to the next tier that it would be a raise for any G6 invited to it.
Its the tier after that you don't want to be stuck in.
I know you are making some good points, but there are also arguments for the other side.
The three teams you list in Memphis, USF and ECU all are located in much smaller markets than UNLV and also are much lower tier teams than other college programs in their own state that they must compete against.
Memphis is located in a state that has power house SEC program Tennessee and a second SEC program in Vandy. There is also a very large following of SEC program Ole Miss by people living in Memphis, which is located located approximately 1 hr away. Memphis also has a population that is less than half of that of Las Vegas.
USF The new stadium they are building is limited to 35K without a major expansion. The one advantage they do have is they are located in a large metro area with no other college football team, but they do compete with a large number of program in Florida in regards to viewership. Most likely this would be by far the best team from the east and would add a 4th team to the east which would mean number 18 would be a good placement for UNLV.
ECU has a good sized stadium (50K), is located in a relatively small county with about 500,000 people, and competes with North Carolina, Duke, North Carolina and many other smaller programs.
As for out west, how would you lock up Colorado when you already have it locked up with the Univ of Colorado, it would add nothing to the media market by picking CSU. SDSU has a small stadium and is playing really bad right now. Compared to those two program, as for OSU and WSU, nobody wanted them before they started collapsing in sports, and I see nothing changing there.
As for your statement regarding the ACC, "they could backfill and stay regional" that would actually be to the advantage of UNLV football with the Big 12. Currently UNLV is located near bywho, Utah, Arizona, Arizona State, so would be a natural fit for expansion. If they go for two teams out west, I could easily see SDSU and UNLV to fill in the rest of the southwest.
I think the ball is fully in UNLV's court and how the basketball team and football team do this next season could say a lot towards whether they are legit options for expansion. If UNLV basketball can make the NCAA playoffs and UNLV football can beat BSU and go to the football playoffs, I think that would put them in a great position, fall apart and the talk would disappear!
You bring up fair points. I'm not saying any of the schools listed are better or more desirable.
All Im saying is it isn't a sure thing for UNLV. Far from it.
CSU has excellent facilities. They are investing. Yes they are behind CU but would lock up Colorado for the BIG12. CSU has reach across the state. This isn't a USU/BYU/UTAH situation.
Scenario for ACC is UNC leaving. ECU fills some of that void. Their attendance numbers a very good.
Tulane fits academically. And would get them in a new market.
USF fills some of the loss of FSU.
Memphis fills in for Clemson etc.
Only reason for ACC to move West is to help Cal or Stanford with travel.
BIG12 same thing. They don't 'need' UNLV.
A lot depends on what UNLV does over next 5 years.
I like what Harper is doing. I like that UNLV is going all in, but it assures nothing. I'm just happy they are at least making an effort.
Hopefully it pays off. But I would hardly be shocked if we get passed over.
Last edited:
Similar threads
