PAC 10 is now talking expansion..

**Color Me Badd Fan** · 12-17-2009, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post

We will dominate it, once we're in the Pac 12. Moreover, we're looking forward to our new rivalry with COlorado. Denverites already have a big head of hate built up for SLC.

Who do you think the Big 12 would have replace Colorado? They would run to BYU in that case and they would probably view it as a step up from Colorado in terms of the overall quality of the athletic program and the size of the fanbase.

**ERCougar** · 12-17-2009, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post

We will dominate it, once we're in the Pac 12. Moreover, we're looking forward to our new rivalry with COlorado. Denverites already have a big head of hate built up for SLC.

So belonging to the PAC 12 is more important than going to the SUGAR BOWL? Got it.

**TripletDaddy** · 12-17-2009, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by Color Me Badd Fan View Post

I think the Pac 10 brought in schools like Oregon State and Washington State out of necessity.

Oregon State was one of the founding schools. Washington State was added before SC and UCLA.

**Color Me Badd Fan** · 12-17-2009, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post

Oregon State was one of the founding schools. Washington State was added before SC and UCLA.

Thanks for the info.

But I think the point still stands that the fact the Pac 10 has the natural traveling partner structure exists by virtue of simply gathering the biggest athletic programs with palatable academics that are available geographically. From a TV contract standpoint, it would be dumb to simply add both Utah and BYU and the Pac 10 recognized this when it tried to add Texas and Colorado. With that said,of course they would break with tradition to get Texas, and maybe they wouldn't want to do that just to land Utah. In that sense, Colorado and CSU would be added. But, again, the Pac 10 has a bad TV contract and its critical to add the most markets it can. The perception would be that adding Colorado and Utah adds Denver and SLC.

If faced with the choice of Colorado-Utah or Colorado-CSU, I just have a hard time believing that the powers that be in the Pac 10 would choose the latter over the former since CSU would be an instant WSU-esque weight against the conference.

I was talking to a guy I work with whose FIL was high up in the UC system (I don't want to give up too much info here). His membership in the LDS church was a huge obstacle to overcome to obtain the position he held. I can see UCLA, Cal and Stanford simply not allowing for the addition of BYU.

**TripletDaddy** · 12-17-2009, 02:48 PM

You may be right, I am not sure.

the only thing I do know for sure is that the PAC consists entirely and exclusively of schools that are paired off geographically...not only in the same state, but in almost all instances, within very short distances of each other.

**Color Me Badd Fan** · 12-17-2009, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post

You may be right, I am not sure.

the only thing I do know for sure is that the PAC consists entirely and exclusively of schools that are paired off geographically...not only in the same state, but in almost all instances, within very short distances of each other.

If they go that route, Colorado-CSU are the teams they'll choose since BYU is unpalatable to at least four of the schools in the Pac 10. So ironically, BYU could keep Utah out of the Pac 10. And when the Big 12 loses Colorado to the Pac 12, they'll snap up BYU in a hurry leaving Utah in the MWC. lol.

Personally, I think they'd be nuts to include CSU. Seattle to Pullman is 315 miles and no one outside those two markets gives a damn about that rivalry. It's hard to understand the rationale of the Pac 10 on that point if that is indeed a priority.

**Shaka** · 12-17-2009, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post

Why don't you read what the article linked at the top of this thread says about this issue.

It's funny how some of you think the world revolves around football. Guess what, it doesn't. Most of the world doesn't care about it, particularly the world of universities. The universities prize their academic reputations, which are not unrelated to conference affiliation, most of all. If you want to talk money, fine. As we pointed out in another thread, Michigan gets $1 billion per annum in research grants and contracts, based on its academic reputation and the standing of its professors. In contrast, its entire varsity sports budget is $59 mllion.

I read the article a year or two ago that got everyone's panties in an uproar. Since then the "research" aspect of the selection has been recycled a bunch of times. Utes find it convenient to bring up as the reason they would be more ideal for the PAC-10.

While research may figure in to a a degree, I will almost guarantee you that TV-market, fan base, geographic location of said fan base, facilities, competitiveness of athletic programs, and ability to generate other athletic related revenues will play a much larger part of the equation. Academic reputation/student quality will figure in but both Utah and BYU will meet this requirement.

**LA Ute** · 12-17-2009, 06:35 PM

I love reading posts on the Ute Board about how BYU has no chance of getting in the PAC-10, while Utah is a very good candidate; and posts here (and on CB) about how Utah really has nothing special to offer the PAC-10 and BYU really has what the PAC wants, if only some of the PAC schools would get over their religious prejudice; meanwhile the Big 12 would take BYU in a heartbeat. Both sets of view seem a little questionable, and seem intent on depicting the preferred school as quite glorious and desirable, and the rival as quite worthless and undesirable.

**TripletDaddy** · 12-17-2009, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by LA Ute View Post

I love reading posts on the Ute Board about how BYU has no chance of getting in the PAC-10, while Utah is a very good candidate; and posts here (and on CB) about how Utah really has nothing special to offer the PAC-10 and BYU really has what the PAC wants, if only some of the PAC schools would get over their religious prejudice; meanwhile the Big 12 would take BYU in a heartbeat. Both sets of view seem a little questionable, and seem intent on depicting the preferred school as quite glorious and desirable, and the rival as quite worthless and undesirable.

thank you for this insight into the psyche of a message board and its rival. The home fans are partial to their own team while they denigrate the rival.

I have noticed a similar pattern but didn't have the courage to note it publicly. You are a braver man than I!

**LA Ute** · 12-17-2009, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post

thank you for this insight into the psyche of a message board and its rival. The home fans are partial to their own team while they denigrate the rival.

I have noticed a similar pattern but didn't have the courage to note it publicly. You are a braver man than I!

Be quiet, you!

**UteStar** · 12-17-2009, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by LA Ute View Post

Be quiet, you!