- Joined
- Jun 8, 2014
- Messages
- 265
- Reaction Score
- 216
Sure it failed in the WAC, but no one cared about it on a national level.
Exactly! The WAC was more watered down (no offense to their past member schools) than the B1G or SEC big name programs. The ACC is perched fairly close to the "watered-down" edge of P5 quality school criteria with all the private schools, but even those ACC schools have money to make it work. The PAC and B12 may become watered down if 16 becomes a target number. I often wonder if the PAC and B12 will grow in the foreseeable future, especially if the NCAA grants the B12 a championship game at 10. The PAC seems happy where they are.
I think the PAC would be wise to stop at 12 and maybe B12 wise to stop at 10 (or grow 2 more if forced). Swofford and the aTm administration created this mess IMO, but now the ACC, SEC and B1G are entrenched with 14 schools apiece. As weird as it sounds, they have to go to 16 if they want to keep regional rivalries and play member schools more often. That likely makes the B12 and ACC a target of more poaching in 10 or 12 years, as there aren't many desirable non-P5 choices outside of UConn, Cincinnati and BYU (and there needs to be 3 more desirable schools outside of the P5 to stave off further B12/ACC poaching). FWIW, UConn is probably the only non-P5 school the B1G would go after. The SEC wouldn't be interested in any of them, I don't think. The ACC and B12 might bite though.
Last edited: