Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I don't see a single thread on PAC-10 expansion...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I don't see a single thread on PAC-10 expansion...

    Not one from today, anyway.

    Pretty interesting news. BYU would have to scratch and claw to get a Big XII invite. BYU would do well in the Big XII North. Nebraska would have to come to Provo every other year, and every 4th year we'd get UT, OK, TaMU, etc.

    It's fun to dream...

  • #2
    Is there some reason there should be one?

    EDIT: I see that it has been mentioned on sports radio. The reason its not on here is probably that most of the posters here don't listen to much sports radio.
    Last edited by falafel; 09-02-2009, 03:41 PM. Reason: to put in that remark about sports radio
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

    Comment


    • #3
      A guy at work told me that he'd heard about something on the radio at work -there was some kind of interview on either 1320 or 1280 with someone from the PAC-10. Somehow it was intimated that the PAC-10 was actually considering expansion, and the teams they were interested in were Utah and Colorado.

      I just jumped on CB and it's the topic de jour today over there. I haven't had to me to read any of the thr3eads though...

      With a Big XII team leaving logic would dictate that BYU would be a prime candidate to replace Colorado in the Big XII North. Other candidates would have to include TCU, but that'd really get the Big XII nothing. They don't have a big stadium. They bring nothing in terms of incremental TV audience (Big XII already OWNS DFW market). It would make recruiting tougher on the rest of the conference (kids form DFW/Texas say no to TCU now because they aren't BCS. If they sudenly WERE BCS, they'd instantly upgrade their attractiveness in recruiting, at the direct expense of other Big XII schools. So adding TCU would hurt the recruitment of the rest of the league.)

      Others to consider - Arkansas (good luck getting them to leave the SEC). Houston (see all the arguments against TCU). Boise State (I'm just sayin'). Any others?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by statman View Post
        Not one from today, anyway.

        Pretty interesting news. BYU would have to scratch and claw to get a Big XII invite. BYU would do well in the Big XII North. Nebraska would have to come to Provo every other year, and every 4th year we'd get UT, OK, TaMU, etc.
        It's two out of every four years.

        But Colorado's never going to leave the Big 12. They've been with us since the Big 7, and they have little to gain. And the Pac 10 has even less to gain, having to add on a conference title game.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Babs View Post
          But Colorado's never going to leave the Big 12. They've been with us since the Big 7, and they have little to gain. And the Pac 10 has even less to gain, having to add on a conference title game.
          Yeah, but its (apparently) the PAC 10 Commish that's driving these rumors.
          Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

          "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

          GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Babs View Post
            But Colorado's never going to leave the Big 12. They've been with us since the Big 7, and they have little to gain. And the Pac 10 has even less to gain, having to add on a conference title game.
            It's incomprehensible to me that any school would rather be in the Big 12 than the Pac 10.
            When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

            --Jonathan Swift

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
              It's incomprehensible to me that any school would rather be in the Big 12 than the Pac 10.
              It's incomprehensible to me that the PAC-10 would want to expand to 12 teams.
              "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
              "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
              "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

              Comment


              • #8
                And while I have the stream of consciousness going...

                The reason why the PAC-10 might want to raid the MWC right now ---> the MWC has created for itself a pretty good argument that it should be included in the BCS. to keep themselves whole financially, the other BCS teams/leagues have to either find a way to simply exclude the MWC again (getting hard), or find a way to make it so the MWC won't meet the criteria. Remove a couple top teams from the MWC, and suddenly the MWC doesn't have a leg to stand on in saying that they belong in the BCS.

                So by deluting the money pool within the PAC-10 itself, the PAC-10 could actually be protecting its total money pool.

                Just making up numbers - $1 billion divided 6 ways = $166 million per BCS league. Divided by 10 PAC-10 teams = 16.6 million per PAC-10 team. Again, with made-up numbers, that's where they are now. Each PAC-10 team gets roughly 1.67% of the total BCS pie.

                But if the BCS expands to 7 leagues, that's going to drop significantly: to about 1.4% of the BCS pie (1 billion/7/10) = 1.43%.

                If the PAC-10 can keep the number of qualifying BCS leagues at 6, and divide it's share by 12, the league keeps it's share intact, but it has to be split by two extra teams - each team gets 1.39% of the BCS pie (make-believe 13.88 million per team). it seems that the PAC-10 woud be better off just letting the MWC in.

                BUT - there's always a but - if they expand to 12 teams, they get a PAC-10 championship game that's got to be worth at least $1-2 million per team (the rule of thumb in the Big XII says their championship game is worth as much to them as another BCS berth). That puts them up to $14.9 - $15.9 million per team, a lot closer to where hey began then where they'd be if the BCS went to 7 leagues...

                The PAC-10 has always maintained that they aren't interested in a championship game. But what if expanding, and including a championship game would make it so that you didn't have to split the BCS pie 7 ways, but could keep it at 6? It's now a defensive strategy to try to maintain cash-flows rather than just a money grab. The PAC-10 commissioner now says 'we stand to lose $25 million as a conference if we let BCS exapnsion happen. Or we could stop it, split the pie 12 ways, and make up most of the difference per team with a PAC-10 championship game." That's a whole different question with a different set of selling points to the PAC-10 Presidents...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                  It's incomprehensible to me that the PAC-10 would want to expand to 12 teams.
                  exactly.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The rationale for the Pac-10 to go to 12 teams is to get a championship game which gets its champion in a position more likely to get into the BCS title game. Several times, PAC10 teams in the past have been on the outside looking in (Oregon 2001, USC 2003/2008, others(?)) and they have felt unjustly so.

                    However, I think it's still pretty unlikely and I don't believe for a second BYU would be on the PAC10's top two list.
                    Everything in life is an approximation.

                    http://twitter.com/CougarStats

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                      It's incomprehensible to me that the PAC-10 would want to expand to 12 teams.
                      It would be a defensive strategy - pillage the MWC before teh MWC forces its way into the BCS. Keep the PAC-10's piece of the the same (1/6th), and use a championship game to make up the per-school impact.

                      If you do nothing, the MWC is very likely going to get in and your six piece pie gets split into 7 (and if the MWC adds BSU, there's no way they get kept out of the BCS). If you do somehtig, you can keep it split 6 ways and do your best to maximize other incremental revenue.

                      My guess is that would eb their sole motivation for expansion. As a preemptive strike against the MWC...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Babs View Post
                        It's two out of every four years.

                        But Colorado's never going to leave the Big 12. They've been with us since the Big 7, and they have little to gain. And the Pac 10 has even less to gain, having to add on a conference title game.
                        No - teams within their division would come two out of every four. Teams outside their division would come to Provo only every 4 years...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by statman View Post
                          It would be a defensive strategy - pillage the MWC before teh MWC forces its way into the BCS. Keep the PAC-10's piece of the the same (1/6th), and use a championship game to make up the per-school impact.

                          If you do nothing, the MWC is very likely going to get in and your six piece pie gets split into 7 (and if the MWC adds BSU, there's no way they get kept out of the BCS). If you do somehtig, you can keep it split 6 ways and do your best to maximize other incremental revenue.

                          My guess is that would eb their sole motivation for expansion. As a preemptive strike against the MWC...
                          You neglect to consider that instead of adding a 7th BCS conference, they could just boot the worst BCS conference, i.e. the Big East.
                          Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

                          "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

                          GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            That's a court battle they woudl LOVE to fight. And you get the BCS into an actual court room, fighting over actual money, and the whole hose of cards could come crashing in. They'd almost certinaly not risk it. they'd be better off splitting it 7 ways than either trying to deny the MWC a share or kicking out the Big (L)East.

                            A court fight is somthing they simply cannot afford - because they know the whole thing would be thrown out as anti-competitive...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              They'd throw the Big East out and let the MWC in before they'd have seven leagues in the BCS. And I don't think that is impossible. The Big East is really not good and the idea that the Big East commands the the big East Coast markets is simply a myth that doesn't seem to backed up by any TV ratings I've seen.

                              The other angle behind the Pac 10 taking Utah and trying to pick off Colorado (and BYU would then be the natural replacement for Colorado) would be to permanently neuter the MWC so that it wouldn't have to compete with it out west for recruits, TV audience, etc. in the event the MWC were to ever become a BCS conference. Strategically, it would be a smart move for the Pac 10 and basically permanently solidify it's position throughout this region. The big IF here is Colorado. I don't see any reason why Colorado would want to leave.

                              There's no way in hell that BYU is going to be included in the Pac 10. As far as athletic programs go, Utah is deemed BYU's equal or superior right now. The difference, of course, is the following. Utah doesn't have BYU's following, but Utah doesn't have the BYU baggage. Altogether, Utah is the more desirable athletic program to the Pac 10.

                              BYU would have to make a concession and offer not to compete in the Big 12 basketball tournament. I don't think the Sunday issue is enough to make BYU unattractive to the Big 12 because the regular season conference games (at least last year) took place on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
                              Part of it is based on academic grounds. Among major conferences, the Pac-10 is the best academically, largely because of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. “Colorado is on a par with Oregon,” he said. “Utah isn’t even in the picture.”

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X