Dominoes lining up: Pac-10 to consider expansion

Donate To GopherHole

Utah is the logical choice, I was thinking BYU as the second team. Colorado seems a bit out of the way. Interesting though. The other school is UNLV, not now, but as Las Vegas grows that is going to become a more prominent school.

I would think there is going to be some re-alignment. The Big East is going to need to add a school or two for football. It seems like a consolidation of the smaller non bcs conferences is going to occur.
 

Why does the PAC 10 see the need to do this? They have nearly the perfect set-up. 2 schools in each West Coast state with 4 in California. All paired up as rivals of one another Arizona-ASU, USC-UCLA, Cal-Stanford, Wash-WSU, Oregon-OSU. Why mess with it?

What comes next? NDSU and SDSU to the WAC to replace Utah and BYU?
 

BYU will never be a part of the Pac-10 for two reasons. 1) They're in the same boat as Notre Dame in that they, for all intents and purposes, have no grad school. 2) It takes a unanimous vote to expand the PX, and the eggheads at Stanford will not be allowing the Stormin' Mormons into their league anytime soon.

They'll have better luck getting Colorado and Utah to go west than convincing Stanford to let in BYU.
 

The Pac10 has a sweet deal going right now, I don't see why they would want to tinker with it. The Big Ten is a different story because of the 11 team angle, but the P10 is balanced nicely.
 



howeda7 said:
Why does the PAC 10 see the need to do this? They have nearly the perfect set-up. 2 schools in each West Coast state with 4 in California. All paired up as rivals of one another Arizona-ASU, USC-UCLA, Cal-Stanford, Wash-WSU, Oregon-OSU. Why mess with it?

What comes next? NDSU and SDSU to the WAC to replace Utah and BYU?
Click to expand...

hahahahahahaha, i have family in moorhead mn and many in the ndsu camp think they have a shot to be the next big ten school or if that doesnt work they can become the next boise st. i wonder what is in the water up there
 

DarrenTheGreek said:
Agreed. The Pac10 shouldn't expand.
Click to expand...

I agree but they've explored it before but they may just be exploring it again.

Texas - Politically couldn't and wouldn't leave the other Texas schools.

Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas and Kansas State - would all LOVE to leave the "Texas/Okie Conference".

Utah, Boise State and TCU - would probably take the gamble on a BSC Conference, if any would have them. Title 9 and "what do you bring to the table" considerations enter in here. I wonder if any of these schools would be looking at 10 win seasons or Final Four trips if they played in the Pac 10, Big 10 or the Texas/Okie South?
 

GopherRock said:
BYU will never be a part of the Pac-10 for two reasons. 1) They're in the same boat as Notre Dame in that they, for all intents and purposes, have no grad school. 2) It takes a unanimous vote to expand the PX, and the eggheads at Stanford will not be allowing the Stormin' Mormons into their league anytime soon.

They'll have better luck getting Colorado and Utah to go west than convincing Stanford to let in BYU.
Click to expand...

I'd love to blame no BYU to the Pac-10 on Stanfurd intolerance, but that's not the biggest stumbling block. BYU refuses to play on Sundays which affects scheduling in every Pac-10 sport but football. Olympic sports matter to the Pac-10 more than other conferences, so no Sunday games won't fly. Pac-10 does have some strong schools academically, but ASU isn't exactly Harvard of the Desert, so the academic excuse isn't a deal killer.

Texas and Colorado would be no brainers, but that ship sailed. All the other options dilute the financial pool rather than expand it. Pac-10 has a sweet set up: paired rivalries, the major West Coast TV markets, the best athletic/academic combos in the West, full round-robin in football and double round-robin in hoops. Only reason to expand is a sure athletic/academic slam dunk (Texas/CU or A&M) which adds new major media markets.

I'd prefer to see Big Ten/Pac-10 say no to expansion and have the conference championship games stripped away from other confernces as part of an eight or sixteen team playoff in football.
 



Ski U Master said:
The Pac10 has a sweet deal going right now, I don't see why they would want to tinker with it. The Big Ten is a different story because of the 11 team angle, but the P10 is balanced nicely.
Click to expand...

Adding BYU and Utah would keep their balanced schedule with in-state rivalries, and would give them a conference championship game. The unbalanced home/away conference schedule has created a lot of issues. They will probably cut back to 8 games like everyone else.

Utah/ BYU make more sense than it ever has. Salt Lake City is today what Phoenix and Dever were in the 1970's-2000.
 

lakesgopher said:
hahahahahahaha, i have family in moorhead mn and many in the ndsu camp think they have a shot to be the next big ten school or if that doesnt work they can become the next boise st. i wonder what is in the water up there
Click to expand...

NDSU and SDSU are good enough for a league like the Big Sky. They're not good enough for the WAC, but it's not totally ridiculous. The Big 10? Seriously, they can't be that delusional can they? Northern State has as much chance as they do. 0%.
 

I agree, the timing is not right for the Pac10 to expand. BYU and Utah would seem to be the best pair to add in terms of balancing the scheduling/rivalries within the conference. Maybe they should wait until all this potential realignment caused by the big10 expansion subsides and see who is left unsatisfied (i.e. Colorado, etc.).

I wish the NCAA would just require all BCS conferences to have exactly 12 teams, two divisions, and a conference title game. Then people would quit complaining about how unfair it is for some teams to have to play that extra game and some don't.
 

If I was Boise right now really, really quitely I would be in contacting Utah, BYU and TCU to start off with then Hawaii and Fresno State and trying to talk them into forming a conference of non-BCS school powerhouses. Because there is a very reasonable possiblity that those first 3 teams listed are all going to BCS conferences. Pac-10 taking Utah and BYU(if Stanford pulls its head out of the sand and BYU gives in on the playing on Sunday thing-wouldn't give either greater than a 50% chance but still). If the B10 takes Mizzou-which isn't my first choice(Pitt)-that leaves the B12 with 11 teams and you think Texas wouldn't throw its weight around and get TCU in the conference. That leaves Bosie out in the cold for non-BCS powers making there schudule look really really weak.

Now on the other hand if Bosie is the only current non-BCS power still left in a non-BCS confernce as long as they ran the table every year they would most likely go to a BCS bowl.
 



GopherRock said:
BYU will never be a part of the Pac-10 for two reasons. 1) They're in the same boat as Notre Dame in that they, for all intents and purposes, have no grad school. 2) It takes a unanimous vote to expand the PX, and the eggheads at Stanford will not be allowing the Stormin' Mormons into their league anytime soon.

They'll have better luck getting Colorado and Utah to go west than convincing Stanford to let in BYU.
Click to expand...

I don't think academics or grad schools would be the stumbling block for BYU to the Pac-10. Their business school is in the top 30 (ranked higher than Carlson) and their law school is a top 50 law school. Plus, the depth of academic reputation in the Pac 10 is not what it is in the Big Ten. Yes, Stanford, Cal, and USC are all very highly regarded, but Oregon State and Washington State bring them down.

The biggest issue with BYU would be the differences in philosophies between the ultra-liberal California schools and the ultra-conservative BYU. I wonder if the Cali schools would welcome that into their club.

UNLV would be a nice addition with the population in Las Vegas and the potential for growth there, and of course the money that Las Vegas could bring to the table. I am surprised that to this point UNLV has not taken off as a big-time athletic school with all of the money in Vegas. Perhaps the conflict of interest between college athletics and gambling entities is the reason it is still a relatively small-time athletic program.

I like the idea of Colorado, as their university reputation and philosophy seem to be a better fit with the Pac 10 than the Big XII, but they are somewhat in no-mans land geographcally. Not really a geographical fit with either conference, and no natural rival or traveling partner to join with.

Utah and TCU would be nice additions, but I don't know about Boise State. Besides football, what do they bring to the table? Boise State in the same conference as USC and Stanford? Does not seem right to me.
 

mnboiler said:
If I was Boise right now really, really quitely I would be in contacting Utah, BYU and TCU to start off with then Hawaii and Fresno State and trying to talk them into forming a conference of non-BCS school powerhouses. Because there is a very reasonable possiblity that those first 3 teams listed are all going to BCS conferences. Pac-10 taking Utah and BYU(if Stanford pulls its head out of the sand and BYU gives in on the playing on Sunday thing-wouldn't give either greater than a 50% chance but still). If the B10 takes Mizzou-which isn't my first choice(Pitt)-that leaves the B12 with 11 teams and you think Texas wouldn't throw its weight around and get TCU in the conference. That leaves Bosie out in the cold for non-BCS powers making there schudule look really really weak.

Now on the other hand if Bosie is the only current non-BCS power still left in a non-BCS confernce as long as they ran the table every year they would most likely go to a BCS bowl.
Click to expand...

Basically the Mountain West plus Boise State, Fresno State, and possibly Nevada would make a very strong conference. Utah, BYU, TCU, Boise, all in the same conference, plus schools like Fresno, Nevada, Colorado State, and Air Force pop up and have big seasons every so often. And the bottom end-Wyoming, New Mexico, UNLV, and San Diego State are competitive as well. They would also have big metro markets San Diego, Vegas, Salt Lake and Cheyenne (kidding) and smaller markets in Reno and a presence in Denver. I realize these are all pretty much covered with the current MWC, but a couple added headliners might give them more of a foothold in the rapidly growing inter-mountain west.
 

Just to stop all the whinning

Boise State and Utah should go to the Pac 10. Join the BCS, play with the Big Boys and take a shot. Colorado stay in the Big 12. If The Big 10 goes after Missouri, the Big 12 reaches out to TCU. But I think the Big 10 will go east to Pitt, Syracuse, or Rutgers. Why? TV markets. It would break the Big 10 into an East and West. For the sake of alignment Pitt, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Indiana. Purdue, Illinois, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Iowa, Minnesota. 6 Big Ten Games in Divison, and a rotating 2 out of Division. The Championship Game held in Chicago at Soldier Field the first Saturday in December. The only problem with my scenario is the battle will focus in the east, the OSU-Michigan game might be more huge for the chance to respresent the East. For the Gophers its no cake walk, but again the focus on the Wisconsin and Iowa games might take on the stature of an SEC battle.
 

Boise State

will not a invited to the Pac 10 until they actually become a university academically, they offer 1 masters and no PhDs, they are a junior college with a blue football field they plays great in a mediocre football world but at nothing else except for wrestling. They will go to the Mountain West to be with similar schools and Idaho will rise up to take athletic control in WAC football and basketball as long as they maintain their current coaches (unlikely). Academically, Idaho blows by BSU. The BCS should strengthen academic requirements for schools to participate in the BCS games. If congress forces the issue of a playoff, it will go back to the way it was prior to the BCS as a playoff will be devastating financially and the big schools won't go for it. Period. They've already said so.
 

idagopher said:
will not a invited to the Pac 10 until they actually become a university academically, they offer 1 masters and no PhDs, they are a junior college with a blue football field they plays great in a mediocre football world but at nothing else except for wrestling. They will go to the Mountain West to be with similar schools and Idaho will rise up to take athletic control in WAC football and basketball as long as they maintain their current coaches (unlikely). Academically, Idaho blows by BSU. The BCS should strengthen academic requirements for schools to participate in the BCS games. If congress forces the issue of a playoff, it will go back to the way it was prior to the BCS as a playoff will be devastating financially and the big schools won't go for it. Period. They've already said so.
Click to expand...

How would a play-off be devastating financially? ESPN, Fox would pay huge $$ for it and the minor bowls could still exist.
 

just watch discussion

on B10 network on Penn State open campus with B10 ad's, they laid it all out quite clearly, college football would need to become Pro ball with corporate $$$ to make it, tv revenue won't do it, and the corporate involvement will corrupt the college game, their discussion was very clear and convincing. Bowl games are each independent businesses and need to make money and get the majority of the income and need to fill seats to make money, tv revenue hinges on many factors and viewers are one and attendance is another. The Fiesta bowl will be poorly attended, neither team travels that well and neither has a large body of alimni living in the area or in the case of BSU, many alumni at all. TCU can't even sell out home games. Most BSU fans aren't alumni of BSU or any university, a lot didn't make it through high school. Also large bodies of alumni help with donations with donations to your athletic programs, look at the donations Gopher alumni made for TCF, it was tremendous. he ad's were collective in agreeing going back to the bowl tie-in system if the BCS goes away would be better financially than a playoff system that means a season schedule of 15 or 16 games.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom