Pac-12 Expansion: What’s Next for the Conference?The future of Pac-12 expansion has become one of the most talked-about and, frankly, heart-wrenching topics in college sports. What was once a prestigious Power 5 conference, steeped in tradition and academic excellence, found itself at the epicenter of an unprecedented realignment earthquake. For anyone following college athletics, it’s been a wild ride, and if you’re like me, you’ve probably been scratching your head wondering what on earth is going to happen next. This isn’t just about adding a new team or two; we’re talking about the potential rebirth or, regrettably, the final chapter of a storied institution. The Pac-12 , known for its Olympic sports prowess and iconic football rivalries, saw its foundation crumble with the departure of its most prominent members. It started with the bombshell news that USC and UCLA, two cornerstones of the conference, were heading to the Big Ten. Guys, that felt like a punch to the gut, setting off a chain reaction that nobody truly anticipated in its full destructive force. Soon after, more dominoes fell, with Colorado, Arizona, Arizona State, and Utah making the jump to the Big 12, followed by Oregon and Washington also joining the Big Ten. Suddenly, the Pac-12, often called the “Conference of Champions,” was reduced to just two remaining schools: Washington State and Oregon State. This dramatic shift transformed the conversation around Pac-12 expansion from a strategic growth initiative into an existential struggle for survival. The question wasn’t just if the Pac-12 would expand, but could it expand, and if so, what would that even look like? Would it be a complete rebrand, a partnership, or something entirely new? The stakes couldn’t be higher for the student-athletes, the communities, and the legacy of these institutions. Understanding the context of this collapse is crucial to grasping the complexities of any potential Pac-12 expansion moving forward. It’s a story of media rights, shifting loyalties, and the undeniable draw of big money in an ever-evolving sports landscape. The very idea of expansion now carries a different weight, representing a glimmer of hope for a conference that seemed all but lost. We’re going to dive deep into the details, explore the reasons behind the exodus, look at who might have been potential candidates for a new-look Pac-12, and discuss the colossal obstacles that stand in the way of any meaningful revival. So, grab your favorite team’s gear, because we’re about to unpack one of the most fascinating and frustrating sagas in modern college sports history. It’s time to talk about what’s next for the Pac-12 and whether expansion is truly on the cards for this beleaguered conference.## The Shifting Landscape: Why Expansion Became a Hot Topic### The Exodus and Its AftermathThe story of the Pac-12’s decline from a Power 5 juggernaut to a shell of its former self is a compelling case study in modern college football realignment . It’s been a truly wild ride, folks, and frankly, a bit heartbreaking for those of us who grew up watching the Pac-12 After Dark. The initial departure of USC and UCLA sent shockwaves, not just through the conference, but across the entire college sports landscape. These two schools weren’t just any members; they were the flagship institutions, bringing massive media markets, storied traditions, and a significant chunk of the conference’s athletic prestige. Their move to the Big Ten was a game-changer, demonstrating that historical loyalties were rapidly taking a back seat to financial opportunities and media rights deals. This move ignited a ferocious wave of conference shake-ups that left the Pac-12 reeling. The Big Ten, already a financial powerhouse, was looking to expand its footprint into new markets and scoop up valuable West Coast brands. The Big 12, not to be outdone and having lost Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC, needed to fortify its own ranks, and they found willing partners in Colorado, Arizona, Arizona State, and Utah. The sheer speed at which these decisions were made and announced left little room for the Pac-12 to strategize a coherent counter-move. For the remaining schools, especially Washington State and Oregon State, this was an existential crisis of epic proportions. Imagine being left at the party after everyone else has gone home – that’s pretty much what happened. The financial pressures were immense. Without its marquee programs, the Pac-12’s negotiating power for a new media rights deal plummeted. The proposed Apple TV streaming-heavy deal, while innovative, simply couldn’t compete with the gargantuan sums being offered by traditional networks to the Big Ten and Big 12. This disparity in revenue was the ultimate driving force; schools simply couldn’t afford to be left behind while their peers raked in tens of millions more annually. The Pac-12’s decline was a stark reminder that in today’s college athletics, money talks louder than tradition or geography. It wasn’t just about football, either; while football revenue often dictates these moves, the entire athletic department, from basketball to Olympic sports, feels the ripple effect. Losing access to a major media deal means less funding for facilities, coaching salaries, and even student-athlete support. The domino effect was devastating, illustrating how one major move can unravel an entire conference. It transformed the conversation from how the Pac-12 could grow to how it could simply survive, leading to temporary agreements and a legal battle over the conference’s remaining assets. This chapter of college athletics history is a harsh lesson in the brutal realities of realignment, where alliances are fluid and the pursuit of financial stability trumps almost everything else.### The Driving Forces Behind Conference ExpansionAlright, let’s talk about why conferences expand in the first place, because understanding the universal principles behind these mega-mergers helps us grasp the desperate plight and potential strategies of a reconstituted Pac-12 . It’s not just about ego or wanting to be bigger; it’s almost always about that sweet, sweet cash flow and the desire for greater stability. The primary driver, without a doubt, is revenue generation . In today’s college sports landscape, media rights deals are king. A conference with more teams, especially teams that bring in new media markets or boast strong fan bases, can command a significantly higher price from broadcasters. Think about it: more eyes on screens, more advertising dollars, more content for networks to fill. It’s a win-win for the networks and the conferences, theoretically. Each new member potentially adds value by expanding the conference’s geographic footprint and capturing a slice of that new market’s viewership.Beyond the dollars and cents, there’s also the quest for athletic competitiveness . A stronger, deeper conference roster can elevate the quality of play, which in turn makes for a more exciting product for fans and broadcasters alike. This competitiveness also translates into recruiting advantages . Top high school prospects want to play in conferences where they’ll face strong competition, get national exposure, and have a clear path to the pros or at least to significant playing time. Expanding with successful programs can help achieve this and give current members an edge in attracting talent. Let’s not forget the need for stability . In an era where conferences are constantly poaching each other’s members, adding new teams can act as a defensive measure, shoring up the conference’s numbers and making it less vulnerable to further defections. It’s about having strength in numbers and creating a future vision that makes the conference attractive and sustainable long-term. For the Pac-12’s desperate need to avoid complete collapse, expansion was the only way forward. After losing its major brands, the task became not just about adding teams, but about adding teams that could collectively rebuild a viable media product. This meant looking for schools that, even if not traditional Power 5 institutions, brought a strong regional following, a competitive athletic department, and a willingness to invest in a new vision. The goal shifted from enhancing a thriving conference to simply having enough members to qualify as an NCAA Division I multi-sport conference and negotiate any kind of media deal. The value of strong brands still plays a role, even if the available brands are not on the same level as a USC or an Oregon. It’s about finding the best available options to create a cohesive and competitive entity. This is why the conversation around Pac-12 expansion eventually centered on programs from the Mountain West and AAC, which, while not Power 5, often boast solid fan bases and respectable athletic programs. The motivation is always multifaceted, but at its core, it’s about securing a financial future and maintaining a competitive edge in the cutthroat world of college athletics.## Who Were the Potential Candidates for a New-Look Pac-12?### The Usual Suspects and Their AppealWhen the dust began to settle on the initial round of defections, the conversation immediately shifted to: who could possibly fill these massive shoes? For a reconstituted Pac-12 , the focus inevitably turned to successful programs from other Group of Five conferences, particularly the Mountain West schools and some AAC contenders . These schools, while not carrying the Power 5 brand cachet, often boast competitive athletic departments, solid fan bases, and in some cases, attractive media markets. Let’s break down some of the names that constantly popped up and what each candidate brings to the table.From the Mountain West, Boise State was almost always at the top of the list. Guys, their football program is a consistent powerhouse, known for its iconic blue turf and an uncanny ability to upset bigger programs. They bring a strong national identity, particularly in football, and a dedicated fan base, which is crucial for any media deal. While not a massive media market, their brand recognition in college football is undeniable. Then there’s San Diego State , a truly appealing candidate. They offer access to the massive San Diego market , a growing university, and a very respectable athletic department across multiple sports, including a strong basketball program that has reached national prominence. Their new Snapdragon Stadium also showcased their commitment to high-level athletics. Another interesting prospect was UNLV , primarily for its location in Las Vegas . The Vegas market is exploding, not just for tourism, but as a legitimate sports hub, and having a Pac-12 presence there would be incredibly valuable for media exposure and event hosting. Beyond those, Fresno State and Colorado State were frequently mentioned. Fresno State consistently fields competitive teams and boasts a passionate fan base in California’s Central Valley, while Colorado State provides a foothold in the growing Denver area, offering geographic balance and a strong academic profile.From the AAC contenders , SMU and Tulane often came up. SMU, with its location in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, offers access to a huge media market and a wealthy donor base, eager to see their Mustangs compete at a higher level. Tulane, a private university in New Orleans, brings academic prestige and a foothold in another unique and passionate sports market. The conversation even briefly veered towards Gonzaga for basketball-only expansion, given their unparalleled success on the hardwood, though the football question always made that a complex fit. The challenges of integrating these different cultures and athletic philosophies would be immense. Many of these schools operate on different budgets and have distinct academic profiles compared to the original Pac-12. However, for a conference fighting for its life, the value proposition shifted dramatically. It wasn’t about finding perfect academic fits; it was about finding viable athletic programs that could contribute to a cohesive whole, help secure a media deal, and offer some semblance of a competitive future. Each of these schools represents an opportunity to rebuild, bringing their own strengths to what would undeniably be a very different, but hopefully resilient, new-look Pac-12.### Strategic Considerations and Regional AlignmentWhen you’re trying to rebuild an entire conference from scratch, it’s not just about picking the flashiest names; it’s about incredibly detailed strategic considerations and regional alignment . Any potential Pac-12 expansion would need to carefully weigh various factors to ensure the long-term viability and success of the new entity. One of the most crucial elements is the geographic footprint . For the remaining Pac-12 schools, Washington State and Oregon State, finding partners that are relatively close geographically makes a huge difference, especially for travel costs and fan engagement. You don’t want student-athletes from non-revenue sports spending more time on planes than in classrooms, right? Minimizing travel helps reduce expenses, lessens the academic burden on athletes, and allows fans to more easily follow their teams on the road, fostering better rivalries .This brings us to the importance of rivalries . While new schools won’t immediately bring decades-old Pac-12 rivalries, adding schools like Boise State and Fresno State could reignite existing Mountain West rivalries within the new conference structure. Creating compelling matchups is key to generating fan interest and, by extension, media value. It’s about building a sense of community and competition that resonates with viewers. The academic fit is another significant, albeit often overlooked, aspect. The original Pac-12 took immense pride in its academic consortium and the research prowess of its member institutions. While financial necessity drove the initial realignment, for a reconstituted Pac-12 , maintaining some level of academic compatibility would be important for institutional identity. Many of the potential Mountain West candidates, for example, are also strong academic institutions, which would help bridge that gap.However, the financial realities of college sports mean that academic prestige might take a backseat to athletic competitiveness and media market value. The ideal scenario would be to find schools that offer a balance of both, but if forced to choose, the latter often wins out in expansion talks. Beyond the immediate practicalities, there’s also the question of creating a cohesive athletic identity . Would a new Pac-12 be primarily football-focused, or would it continue to prioritize a wide range of sports, as the old Pac-12 did? The types of schools invited would heavily influence this. For example, adding Gonzaga would obviously be a basketball-first move.The discussion around Pac-12 expansion also had to consider the broader NCAA landscape. What would be the perception of a new-look Pac-12? Would it be seen as a viable Power 5 contender, or more akin to a super-Group of Five conference? This perception directly impacts recruiting, media negotiations, and overall prestige. Ultimately, any new Pac-12 would need a carefully crafted strategy that balances geography, academic values, athletic strength, and market appeal to ensure it can not only survive but thrive in this ever-changing environment. It’s like a complex puzzle where every piece has to fit just right to create a stable and attractive picture.## The Reality Check: Obstacles and the Path Forward### Media Rights, Revenue, and the Value PropositionAlright, guys, let’s get real about the biggest hurdle facing any potential Pac-12 expansion : the media rights, revenue, and the value proposition . This is where the rubber meets the road, and honestly, it’s a brutal reality check. The primary reason the original Pac-12 crumbled was its inability to secure a lucrative media rights deal that could compete with the Big Ten and SEC. After losing its major brands—USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, and the Arizona, Colorado, Utah group—the Pac-12’s diminished brand became a colossal obstacle. What kind of money could a conference composed primarily of G5 schools command from major networks? The honest answer is: significantly less.The initial proposed deal with Apple TV, which was heavily reliant on streaming, simply didn’t offer the per-school revenue that remaining members felt they needed to stay competitive. When you’re talking about annual payouts that are tens of millions less than what other Power conferences are getting, it creates an unsustainable gap. How do you recruit top-tier talent, maintain state-of-the-art facilities, and pay competitive coaching salaries when your revenue stream is so dramatically reduced? It’s like trying to run a Formula 1 race with a go-kart; you’re just not equipped for the competition. This massive financial viability issue is the elephant in the room. A reconstituted Pac-12 would have to convince networks that its new lineup of schools, even with the addition of strong Mountain West programs, could generate enough viewership and interest to warrant a substantial investment. The challenge is immense because the allure of the former Pac-12, with its traditional rivalries and national championships, has largely evaporated. The value proposition for broadcasters has changed fundamentally. They are looking for guaranteed eyeballs, and without the marquee matchups involving the departed teams, that guarantee is much harder to make. This creates a vicious cycle: lower media deal value means less revenue, which means it’s harder to attract competitive programs, which further diminishes the media deal value. It’s a tough sell.The perception problem after the exodus is also very real. When a conference loses almost all its members to other leagues, it creates an impression of weakness and instability. This perception impacts everything from national recruiting rankings to the ability to secure desirable non-conference opponents. For Washington State and Oregon State, trying to rebuild the Pac-12 from this position is akin to starting a new business venture with heavily depleted resources and a tarnished reputation. They need to create a compelling narrative and a strong, unified front from any new members to counter this. The biggest obstacle to any meaningful Pac-12 expansion wasn’t just finding new schools, but convincing the financial world that the new entity had enough draw to make it a worthwhile investment. Without that robust media deal, the fundamental economic model of a major college athletic conference simply doesn’t hold up.### The Future of WSU and OSUThe saga of Washington State and Oregon State has become one of the most compelling and, frankly, unprecedented stories in college athletics. These two schools, affectionately dubbed the “Pac-2,” found themselves in an unimaginable position: the sole remaining members of what was once a powerhouse conference. Their fight to preserve the Pac-12 assets and carve out a viable future is nothing short of heroic, but it’s also fraught with immense challenges and uncertainty. Their immediate actions involved a crucial legal battle to gain control of the Pac-12’s assets and governance, preventing the departing schools from simply dissolving the conference and distributing its remaining funds amongst themselves. This was a critical first step, as controlling the assets, including any reserves and intellectual property, provides a foundation for any potential rebirth. For the 2024-25 season, WSU and OSU have forged an agreement with the Mountain West Conference , which allows their football and other sports teams to play a full schedule against Mountain West opponents. This temporary arrangement is a lifeline, providing scheduling stability and preserving their Division I FBS status for football. It also offers a blueprint for what a more permanent partnership or merger might look like.However, this temporary solution doesn’t answer their long-term options . Are they truly hoping to rebuild the Pac-12 from scratch by inviting Mountain West schools to join them ? Or is their ultimate goal to secure an invitation to another existing conference, perhaps the Mountain West itself, or even the Big 12 down the line, should further realignment occur? The idea of rebuilding the Pac-12 from scratch is an incredibly ambitious undertaking. It would require finding a minimum of four, but ideally six to eight, new members to create a viable conference with a robust media deal. This is a tough sell when the conference has lost all its major brands and is essentially starting over. The financial incentives would need to be strong enough to entice schools away from their current conferences, which would be difficult given the diminished negotiating power of a new Pac-12.Alternatively, WSU and OSU could pursue independent status , particularly in football, while finding homes for their other sports. However, independence in football is incredibly challenging, especially for schools without the massive national brand recognition of a Notre Dame. It means having to constantly piece together schedules, which is a logistical nightmare, and often results in lower revenue and less consistent competition. The unprecedented nature of their situation means there’s no clear playbook. They are operating in uncharted territory, demonstrating incredible resilience and a commitment to their athletic programs. Their fight is not just for their own survival, but for the principle of stability and equitable treatment in an increasingly volatile college sports landscape. The future of WSU and OSU will largely dictate whether the name “Pac-12” continues to exist in any meaningful form or if it becomes a historical footnote, a casualty of the biggest realignment wave in modern history. These two schools are essentially holding the fort, trying to figure out if there’s any gold left in the old mine.## Conclusion: What Does “Expansion” Truly Mean Now?So, what’s the bottom line, folks? The Pac-12’s journey from a storied powerhouse to a shadow of its former self is a stark reminder of the ruthless economic forces shaping college athletics today. We’ve seen a conference steeped in academic excellence and athletic tradition crumble under the weight of massive media rights deals and the relentless pursuit of revenue. It’s been a tough pill to swallow for fans, athletes, and administrators alike, marking the end of an era for many of us who grew up with the “Conference of Champions.“Initially, the idea of Pac-12 expansion was about adding strength to an already strong league, perhaps bringing in a new market or shoring up a competitive sport. But as the departures mounted—USC, UCLA, Colorado, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Oregon, and Washington—the meaning of “expansion” fundamentally evolved from adding to a strong conference to rebuilding from almost nothing . For Washington State and Oregon State, the remaining torchbearers, expansion is no longer about growth; it’s about survival. It’s about cobbling together enough viable programs to form a new entity that can command any kind of respect, any kind of media deal, and maintain its NCAA Division I status.The challenges are immense. The diminished brand, the substantial revenue gap compared to other Power conferences, and the logistical complexities of integrating new schools all stand as towering obstacles. While potential candidates from the Mountain West and AAC offer appealing athletic programs and some attractive media markets, they simply cannot replace the financial and brand power of the departed institutions. The strategic considerations of geographic footprint , academic fit , and the arduous task of creating new rivalries from scratch highlight the difficulty of the task at hand. The temporary agreement with the Mountain West provides a crucial lifeline for WSU and OSU, buying them time to strategize their long-term future. Whether this leads to a full merger with the Mountain West, a complete reinvention of the Pac-12 with new members, or some other unprecedented solution, remains to be seen.The dynamic and unpredictable nature of college athletics has been on full display throughout this entire saga. What seemed impossible just a few years ago—the dissolution of a Power 5 conference—is now a tangible reality. This constant pursuit of stability and competitive advantage by every institution means that the landscape is always shifting, always evolving. It forces us to reconsider what loyalty means in an era dominated by dollar signs.Ultimately, the Pac-12 expansion story is less about growing a giant and more about a phoenix potentially rising from the ashes, or perhaps, a bittersweet farewell to a beloved institution. The resilience shown by Washington State and Oregon State is commendable, as they fight for their future and the legacy of the conference. Whatever the outcome, this chapter will undoubtedly be studied for years to come as a pivotal moment in the history of college sports, demonstrating how quickly fortunes can change and how much is truly at stake when traditions clash with the undeniable force of modern economics. The journey continues, and we’ll all be watching to see how this incredible story concludes. Will the Pac-12, in some new form, manage to expand and carve out a new future, or will its name fade into the annals of history? Only time will tell. Stay tuned, because in college sports, you never really know what’s coming next!