I listened to the entire alignment press conference

[ProudUte]

It was a bunch of nothing!

I am not saying that the alignment is bad or that it won’t have positive consequences.  But, this press conference told me NOTHING that we did not already know or assume about the three conference alignment.

I hope to hear about meaningful decisions in the future.   I am glad that these three conferences are trying to save college sports.

 

[Trailgoat]

Yeah, classic leadership speak. See who can string the most words together without saying anything.

Greg Sankey and ESPN response….awe, that was cute :)! 

[MDUte]

I agree that today’s actual announcement was pretty uneventful as far as there being any real specifics shared with the public. However, I do think that the big positive in all of this is the fact that the 3 conferences working together greatly diminishes the risk of poaching taking place between the 3 conferences.

The worst thing that could happen is the B1G reacting to the SEC’s move in knee jerk fashion by convincing USC, UCLA, Oregon, and Washington to join the B1G. We don’t want to see the PAC 12 experience the same fate as the Big 12 and I believe this Alliance prevents that from happening. If nothing more comes from this than that…I’m great with it. Because IMO, the Alliance helps keep Utah’s seat at the table. And we all can appreciate how fortunate we are to be there. Think of TCU…they finally are in the club only to have the rug pulled out from under them. Or what about schools that have always been there like Oklahoma State and Kansas State who are now looking to move down to the G5 ranks. These past 10 years have been amazing, especially seeing the upward trajectory of Utah athletics and academics. I’m for anything that helps protect our standing in the CFB power landscape. Go Utes!

[ProudUte]

Agreed.

[kazute]

I agree that an alliance and intact P-12 is Utah’s best chance at staying at the table. However, absent a non-solicitation agreement (no poaching) this doesn’t fix the risk of USC bolting to the B1G and taking with it the other cherries of the conference.

It all comes down to money. USC wants to consider its options due to the payout disparity. Unless the Pac-12 can seriously cut into that, defections are still a very real possibility.

A binding non-solicitation agreement with a letter of intent regarding future scheduling would have made me feel better than a general understanding (likely not binding at all) that the conferences will work together (until it is not in a conference’s best interest to do so).

Beats an announcement of defections to the B1G, but still disappointing.

[kazute]

Ok. I read a bit more about the “alliance.” I am heartened a bit in that at least they are making public statements (absent a signed agreement) regarding “non-aggression” and “scheduling.” Going public is something I guess.

Though absent fixing major payout discrepancies, defections will continue to be a risk.

[UTE98]

MDUte, one minor quibble. I think when you mention TCU it overlooks the history of TCU. And indirectly the SWC which existed from 1915-1996.

I remember when i attended the TCU-Virginia game back in the mid-2000s one of their fans mentioned how they were really happy Utah was in the MWC with them. He mentioned the old Southwest conferencend how TCU was just recovering from the filth of the SWC. That has always stuck in my mind. If you haven’t seen anything about the SWC demise it would be a good primer for what is happening now in college football. I even think there is a 30 in 30 on ESPN about the SWC. Ironic….???? This was NIL on steroids and everybody looking the other way, everyone in the conference accusing everyone else of cheating (mostly more than they were). Think of SMU, and the death penalty, they are pretty much what the SWC represented.  

Former members of the SWC include Arkansas, TCU, Houston (1976-1996 football), SMU, Baylor, Rice, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech (1956-1996). Oklahoma (1915-1919, part of the Big 8 from 1920-1996, which then became the Big 12) and Oklahoma State (1915-1925) were early members.

Personally I see the SEC’s antics as shades of the SWC, and who knows how long the organization can stand. I think the alliance is in good shape with USC, Washington, Oregon, Ohio State, Michigan (they need to step up), Penn State (have they recovered yet?), Wiscy, Iowa, Nebraska, Clemson, and a few others. The SEC is top heavy with Alabama and Oklahoma, and on occasions Texas, Florida, Georgia, LSU, and Auburn will have good teams. All of those teams have been way behind Alabama lately. And honestly year in year out I would say only Oklahoma has maintained a pace to see Alabama in front of them. But the SEC still has Vanderbilt, Arkansas, Tennessee, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Miss St., Kentucky, and I can’t even think of the other two SEC teams.  Oh, yeah, Texas A&M and Missouri. With seven teams in each side of the SEC, and only one or two good teams it has not been on the same level of parity as what we’ve seen in the Pac-12. And nine conference games has not helped. With USC, Utah, Washington, Oregon and Stanford all able to win games against the others it makes a Pac-12 championship much more difficult than Alabama. From 2012 – 2020 Alabama won their division all but one year (including ties), that is 2019 when LSU won. That has not happened in any other conference. If Texas and Oklahoma think they’ll have an easier road to the NC in the SEC I think they are wrong. But it is all about the $$$$. SWC anyone????

[MDUte]

Interesting, I wasn’t aware of all that SWC history…thanks UTE98.