MWC Proposes PAC 12 Partnership

Hair indicated that he thinks PAC is receptive to a partnership around non-conference scheduling, officiating, and Bowl tie ins given that ACC and Big 12 are exploring a partnership.



The article indicated this alliance would encompass all western BCS schools except Idaho and New Mexico State in the Sun Belt Conference and BYU who is Independent.



If this gets traction - me thinks BYU should also try to partner up.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

:sick: anything dealing with the PAC, especially their officials :sick:

Schmoe wrote:
:sick: anything dealing with the PAC, especially their officials :sick:

This



Stay away from the PAC



Far far away



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

What would be the PAC's motivation for joining such a partnership?



And don't say OOC scheduling, the PAC doesn't "need" the MWC to help fill OOC spots, they get those anyway, they "need" the B10/B12/SEC.

BerliNY wrote:
What would be the PAC's motivation for joining such a partnership?



And don't say OOC scheduling, the PAC doesn't "need" the MWC to help fill OOC spots, they get those anyway, they "need" the B10/B12/SEC.

That was my thought as well... This reminded me of the time I proposed a "partnership" with the hottest girl in school to go to the Sr. Prom with me :love: ... turns out, she declined. :blush: ;)

I remember when Hair Thompson used to say things about how he thought the future would go.

BerliNY wrote:
What would be the PAC's motivation for joining such a partnership?



And don't say OOC scheduling, the PAC doesn't "need" the MWC to help fill OOC spots, they get those anyway, they "need" the B10/B12/SEC.

PAC needs winnable OOC games. The article stated reduced travel costs as a significant factor. It would give PAC a way to play Western teams without having to let them joun the club. With ACC and Big 12 partnering ie Big 12 leaning East and Big 10 growing and leaning East, it gives PAC some defensive measure without them having to expand and include what they perceive to be inferior academic institutions - similar to their arrogance toward BYU.



MWC has survived. Give Hair credit. You all rooted for Benson, but Hair won.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Can't pretty much any PAC 12 team schedule any other MWC team (except Boise St.) whenever they want? They don't need a scheduling partnership with the MWC to get MWC teams to play them. What better alternatives does the MWC have? From a scheduling perspective, the only reason the PAC 12 would do this is if they want to guarantee that Boise St. will be in a PAC 12 stadium every other year.



The main motivation behind any kind of partnership would be officiating and bowl tie ins. A lot has been recently said in the national media about conferences wanting more options for bowl games. The PAC 12 might want a spot in the Hawaii Bowl, Kraft Fight the Hunger, and Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl, but not every year. This creates room for the MWC to get involved. I think we will see some similar arrangements back East as well. Hopefully, BYU can slip into some of these arrangements to be eligible for certain bowl games in 2 out of 4 years, or something like that.

YNot wrote:
Can't pretty much any PAC 12 team schedule any other MWC team (except Boise St.) whenever they want? They don't need a scheduling partnership with the MWC to get MWC teams to play them. What better alternatives does the MWC have? From a scheduling perspective, the only reason the PAC 12 would do this is if they want to guarantee that Boise St. will be in a PAC 12 stadium every other year.



The main motivation behind any kind of partnership would be officiating and bowl tie ins. A lot has been recently said in the national media about conferences wanting more options for bowl games. The PAC 12 might want a spot in the Hawaii Bowl, Kraft Fight the Hunger, and Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl, but not every year. This creates room for the MWC to get involved. I think we will see some similar arrangements back East as well. Hopefully, BYU can slip into some of these arrangements to be eligible for certain bowl games in 2 out of 4 years, or something like that.

My thoughts exactly.

If the article mentioned travel cost then somebody is just writing down a wish they have and I would pretty much ignore it. Most if not all OCC games for these guys are home games 1 and done and they are usually a pay day for the other team. So I would seriously doubt that any BCS conf would be so worried about OOC games and travel costs that they would form an alliance with a nonBCS conf.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

imuakahuku wrote:
If the article mentioned travel cost then somebody is just writing down a wish they have and I would pretty much ignore it. Most if not all OCC games for these guys are home games 1 and done and they are usually a pay day for the other team. So I would seriously doubt that any BCS conf would be so worried about OOC games and travel costs that they would form an alliance with a nonBCS conf.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Most PAC teams do that far less than SEC and others. And some conferences are moving away from rollover games but still want winnable ones. But clearly MWC is not in a strong bargaining position with any of the Big 5 conferences. Perhaps network partners would pay more for BSU or SDSU vs Nearby PAC schools home and away than for UCLA Vs Montana State at home twice.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I recently proposed a strategic partnership with Google. Sure I have nothing to offer them that they can't easily get but I'm sure they'll respond soon.