BYU, Utah to the PAC-12

[The Rambam]

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/utah-b...-century-21278

Talking about the Portland paper article you have seen, this commentary is different, and even more positive for BYU.

He has Boise St. and Fresno St. going to the Mtn. West to replace the Utah losses.

I think the MWC should also grab Nevada, UTEP and Houston to make another 12 team league which would be BCS caliber.

Heck, if BYU and Utah don't get invites to the PAC-10, I think the MWC should add Boise St., Nevada and Houston and have a 12 team league.

[SeattleUte]

Something I've never gotten a straight answer to, would Colorado go to the Pac 10 if invited?

[TripletDaddy]

So in other words, nothing new to report on this topic.

[SeattleUte]

So in other words, nothing new to report on this topic.

Can you give me a straight answer to my question?

[TripletDaddy]

Can you give me a straight answer to my question?

My comment was not directed at you, fyi.

But no, I cannot. How in the world can anyone on a message board answer that question?

My best guess is that Colorado has no reason to move to the PAC10. It is fine just where it is now. Switching laterally won't turn Colorado into a juggernaut.

However, BYU and Utah moving to the PAC would drastically alter everything about those schools, at least athletically. It would be an epic event for both Utah schools.

[SeattleUte]

My comment was not directed at you, fyi.

But no, I cannot. How in the world can anyone on a message board answer that question?

My best guess is that Colorado has no reason to move to the PAC10. It is fine just where it is now. Switching laterally won't turn Colorado into a juggernaut.

However, BYU and Utah moving to the PAC would drastically alter everything about those schools, at least athletically. It would be an epic event for both Utah schools.

I think if there were a strong second team the Pac 10 would take Utah. I don't think BYU is a candidate because of history like Prop 8 and also its weak reputation for research and graduate schools. You can call this bigotry or irrelevance all you want but it matters to the people making the decisions, i.e., the academic administrators.

That's why I ask.

[TripletDaddy]

I think if there were a strong second team the Pac 10 would take Utah. I don't think BYU is a candidate because of history like Prop 8 and also its weak reputation for research and graduate schools. You can call this bigotry or irrelevance all you want but it matters to the people making the decisions, i.e., the academic administrators.

That's why I ask.

Well, unless the PAC breaks with its geographic approach, then adding Utah and Colorado makes no sense. The PAC has gradually expanded, pretty much always adding pairs. The AZ schools are the most recent example.

BYU is definitely a candidate. The PAC schedules games with BYU annually...in fact, multiple times a year.

The academics issue I won't indulge because your premise is silly.

[venkman]

Good to see the "I cant, I'm Mormon" girl again.

She's hot.

[Solon]

The PAC has gradually expanded, pretty much always adding pairs.

Who knows? Give it 30 years and it'll be Utah State and UVU.

[The Rambam]

Something I've never gotten a straight answer to, would Colorado go to the Pac 10 if invited?

I think the probably would go with Utah if asked. JMHO, but I would rather face Oregon and USC as the top teams in my conference than try to run through Nebraska, Texas, aTm, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, OkSt, Kansas, and KState every year. Your chance of a bowl game are much higher in the PAC10 than in the BIG12 IMHO.

Plus, lots of travel to California and Arizona instead of those depressing trips to Manhattan Kansas and Lincoln Nebraska and Lubbock Texas.

This wouldn't be a tough call for me if I were Colorado.

Texas would never leave--to deep of rivals with OK and aTm. But Colorado just might jump.

I personally think if the PAC 10 wants to add two teams they offer Colorado and Utah. Why take on the religious baggage that comes along with BYU?

The BIG12 might take BYU, but probably wouldn't and instead add TCU or Houston or UTEP or Memphis instead.

But the MWC would then add Boise St., Fresno St., Nevada and Houston/Hawaii and be a BCS conference anyway. That wouldn't be the best case, but acceptable from where I sit.

[ERCougar]

Well, unless the PAC breaks with its geographic approach, then adding Utah and Colorado makes no sense. The PAC has gradually expanded, pretty much always adding pairs. The AZ schools are the most recent example.

BYU is definitely a candidate. The PAC schedules games with BYU annually...in fact, multiple times a year.

The academics issue I won't indulge because your premise is silly.

Why is his premise silly? It seems like it comes up every time this issue's discussed in any depth. I hope it's silly, as I would LOVE to join the PAC 10.

[SteelBlue]

Didn't Colorado turn down the Pac-10 once before?

[TripletDaddy]

Why is his premise silly? It seems like it comes up every time this issue's discussed in any depth. I hope it's silly, as I would LOVE to join the PAC 10.

His premise that BYU's academics are inferior to Utah's academics.

Utah is a crappy state school with no admissions standard.

BYU is a decent private school with high admissions standards but little academic freedom in the arts.

The PAC is an athletic conference, not an academic conference. If academics were an issue, AZ, U of A, WSU......they would not be in there. And if Prop 8 were an issue, the PAC would stop scheduling games against us.

[ERCougar]

His premise that BYU's academics are inferior to Utah's academics.

Utah is a crappy state school with no admissions standard.

BYU is a decent private school with high admissions standards but little academic freedom in the arts.

The PAC is an athletic conference, not an academic conference. If academics were an issue, AZ, U of A, WSU......they would not be in there. And if Prop 8 were an issue, the PAC would stop scheduling games against us.

Isn't the issue graduate/research programs and academic freedom issues (more specifically, the latter)?

Regarding Prop 8, scheduling us yearly is very different from embracing us as one of their own.

I'm honestly not sure why or if any of these issues should matter to an athletic conference, and maybe they don't, but there are many things about California that I don't understand.

[TripletDaddy]

Isn't the issue graduate/research programs and academic freedom issues (more specifically, the latter)?

Regarding Prop 8, scheduling us yearly is very different from embracing us as one of their own.

I'm honestly not sure why or if any of these issues should matter to an athletic conference, and maybe they don't, but there are many things about California that I don't understand.

These are definitely the core issues.......according to people on internet message boards.

Since most of these folks have not yet spoken to the Chancellors or Regents about this, I wouldn't put too much stock in what they say.

Like you said, the PAC is an athletic conference. It doesn't matter what BYU's law school rank is. It doesn't matter that Utah has a medical school.

Again, the notion that superior academics are a requirement are completely blown out of the water when you look at the PACs current alignment as well as its most recent expansion. The 2 AZ schools do not fit the criteria of academic powerhouses, nor does WSU or OSU. Oregon and a tier below Washington, imo. At the top of the PAC heap, you have SC/UCLA, and then Cal and Stanford. The top 4 are miles away from the rest in terms of academics and reputation.

I am simply pointing out the to opine that the PAC cares about academics and then to mention Utah but not BYU is basically a joke. Or, silly.