Well, the PAC-12, as we knew it, is long gone now. The final two holdouts clinging to the historic conference, Washington State and Oregon State, have been at the center of a fight for the brand's survival. Here's a quick recap of how we got here and where it’s going.
In 2022, UCLA and USC announced their intentions to leave the PAC-12 and join the Big 10. Their main reasons were to pursue a more lucrative TV deal and play a higher level of competition. This came simultaneously as the PAC-12 was trying to renew its TV rights. Losing two of the conference's most prominent members in a massive media market hurt the PAC-12’s potential TV deal. This led to concerns from the other powerhouse teams, Oregon and Washington, about whether the PAC-12 could provide a competitive TV package.
Ultimately, the PAC-12 could not provide an adequate deal to satisfy Oregon and Washington, who opted to follow USC and UCLA to the Big 10 after the discussion with the PAC broke down in 2023. This left the remaining teams with a tough decision: try to keep the PAC together with no guaranteed TV deal or find another conference to play in.
Colorado, Arizona, Arizona State, and Utah decided to leave, joining the Big 12. This departure left only four remaining schools under the PAC-12 banner: Oregon State, Washington State, California, and Stanford. After seeing the remaining options for the PAC, California and Stanford opted to join the ACC. This seemed like the final nail in the coffin for the conference.
The remaining two schools had a hard choice. Per NCAA rules, they would need at least eight teams in the conference by 2026 to maintain their conference status. So, the task became to find six schools to join the PAC or join another conference. Unfortunately for Washington State and Oregon State, no power conference gave them an invitation, so they would have to join a lower-group conference if they left the PAC. It seemed reasonable that they would join the nearby Mountain West conference, but instead, they partnered with them to build an athletic schedule for 2024.
The PAC two, as they became known, had one advantage. Since the former PAC-12 schools declared their intentions to leave before July 2024, they forfeited voting rights in the PAC-12. This meant the remaining two schools had total control over the PAC, allowing them to control funds and pay off debt. This gave them about a $250 million war chest to rebuild the PAC.
The PAC remained dormant until a massive announcement this September when multiple Mountain West teams announced they were joining the PAC. Boise State, Colorado State, Fresno State, and San Diego State agreed to join the PAC in 2026. Later in the month, Utah State joined as a full member, bringing the PAC to seven schools. In this process, the PAC has shown interest in collecting some universities in the Gulf Coast area, specifically targeting Memphis. This move was a surprise, considering that, up to this point, most PAC teams were localized around the West Coast, besides Colorado State. Memphis declined the offer to join, but the jury is still out on them.
The PAC did manage to find another member in Gonzaga, but since the university doesn’t have a football program, it doesn’t count toward the NCAA 8 school minimum for conference status. Gonzaga could be essential for the PAC's future, providing legitimacy in the college basketball scene. This has opened the door for negotiations with Memphis, who could be the final member required for the PAC to retain its conference status.
With the jury still out on who will be the final addition to the PAC, some names are floating around. As mentioned above, Memphis has been the prime target, but recently, they announced they would stay in the AAC over travel concerns. They released this information in a joint statement with two other coveted teams, USF and UTSA. This was the preferred direction the conference was looking for. Setting up an eastern block of universities would give them national credibility in multiple sports.
There is still reason to believe this could happen if the PAC can make it financially advantageous for them. However, it isn’t likely that these teams will fill the remaining vacancy in the PAC’s lineup right now. They may come on board later, especially if the PAC can negotiate a good TV deal.
With the eastern teams seemingly off the table, there are only a limited number of remaining universities back west. The remaining Mountain West schools also seem off the table, as many have been given significant financial packages to stay in the Mountain West. Teams like UNLV or Air Force were high targets for the PAC, but interest from both sides has dried up.
There are a couple of options with the Mountain West and Gulf teams gone. Texas State has been a name floating around for a while. They were invited to join the Mountain West but reportedly declined the opportunity. They seem to be waiting for a PAC invite or would rather stay in their current conference. They remain an easy option for the PAC to fill out their lineup to 8, but the added travel might not be desirable.
An interesting university that entered the race was Sacramento State. They are not an FBS team but play in the lower college football FCS. However, there is significant interest in developing the athletic program into a full-fledged FBS school. Reportedly, millions of dollars have already been raised for a new football stadium. There have even been talks with the Sacramento Kings about allowing the basketball team to play in the arena while they develop their own facility. However, the university would have a long way to go in a short amount of time. They remain an interesting option if they get off the ground soon and develop their facilities.
Alternatively, several other FCS schools could become FBS schools to fill the PAC’s remaining spot. Montana, Montana State, North Dakota State, and South Dakota State have all been dominant in lower levels of play. With some investment in the current facilities, any of these programs could become an FBS school. However, there has been no word if the PAC has considered any of these schools.
We can’t discuss the PAC12 without discussing what is happening with the Mountain West. The relationship started last year, as the Mountain West agreed to help the remaining two PAC schools fill out an athletic schedule for 2024. This resulted in the PAC playing most of its games against the MW. This came at a price, though, as the PAC was asked to pay $14 million to the MW for the schedule. With few other choices, the PAC accepted, and that’s where we are now.
In this arrangement, the MW made some stipulations about poaching schools away from the MW. There would be a fee of $10 million, plus $500 thousand per additional school, on top of their lofty exit fees for each school. This was to help prevent the PAC from poaching the entire MW without significant financial compensation.
At this time, the MW was trying to have the remaining PAC join the MW as full members, an option the two PAC teams weren’t keen on. This would have led to complications surrounding the war chest of funds they had collected from the departing PAC-12 teams and resolved instead to rebuild. This led to a somewhat amicable relationship until it came time to schedule the 2025 athletic season. The MW doubled their asking price to schedule with them asking for $30 million. This put the PAC in a challenging spot and was most likely a move motivating the PAC to consider joining. Instead, the PAC went on the offensive, poaching 4 of the top universities in the MW.
Things stabilized, with the MW trying to get its remaining eight members to agree to stay. This looked likely until Utah State agreed to join the PAC as well, which tossed the entirety of the MW into doubt. Since then, the MW has stabilized, adding UTEP to fill out its ranks as it has secured agreements from its remaining school members.
The controversy comes from a lawsuit the PAC has taken against the MW, only making the frosty relationship more tense. The PAC is trying to get out of paying the additional poaching fees to the MW. Fees that amount to nearly $55 million. With the PAC claiming the contract was signed under duress, the additional fees shouldn’t be binding. We’ll see how this one settles, but at this time, it’s unclear if the PAC will be success here.