The PAC 10 expansion groundswell

[Top Ute]

[URL="http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_15554326"]Hmm... If Utah, once in the Pac-10+2, has a nine-game conference schedule as well I guessing that the Utes will permanently drop BYU and/or USU from their OOC schedule.

The idea of a 9-game conference schedule is beyond repulsive. It's a hindrance to the objectives sought by expanding to 12 teams. And it pisses me off to no end that people think USC-Stanford and UCLA-Cal are "rivalries" that must be "protected." Because no one's backing a 9-game conference schedule with the idea of protecting any other game.

Personally, I like the idea of having the rivalry with BYU take a break, even after 2011 (when it appears more and more certain that Utah and BYU won't play that year). But if you tell me we can play 8 conference games, but we have to schedule BYU home-and-home every year, I'd slap the Utah fan who wouldn't get behind that proposal.

Our financial agreement with USU is good for both sides (home team pays for visiting team's travel expenses, and keeps 100 percent of the gate), so I want to keep that around. But yeah, if we're going to play 9 conference games, something's gotta give.

[Hot Lunch]

The idea of a 9-game conference schedule is beyond repulsive. It's a hindrance to the objectives sought by expanding to 12 teams. And it pisses me off to no end that people think USC-Stanford and UCLA-Cal are "rivalries" that must be "protected." Because no one's backing a 9-game conference schedule with the idea of protecting any other game.

Personally, I like the idea of having the rivalry with BYU take a break, even after 2011 (when it appears more and more certain that Utah and BYU won't play that year). But if you tell me we can play 8 conference games, but we have to schedule BYU home-and-home every year, I'd slap the Utah fan who wouldn't get behind that proposal.

Our financial agreement with USU is good for both sides (home team pays for visiting team's travel expenses, and keeps 100 percent of the gate), so I want to keep that around. But yeah, if we're going to play 9 conference games, something's gotta give.

I think it has more to do with wanting a game in Southern California every year that is does with the "rivalry". The teams in Oregon and Washington want that trip to So. Cal as well for recruiting purposes. Plus, if the Pac-12 votes that they will not share the T.V. revenue equally, that will be another reason to want the So. Cal teams on their schedule because will be televised games.

If they do a 9 game conference schedule something will have to give. I think it might end up being on the USU end. I know for a fact that USU doesn't want to play both BYU and Utah every season. They have there big money game (Oklahoma this season) and the BYU and Utah on their schedule that are pretty 3 guaranteed loses. I was told by a member of the Utah St coaching staff that they are looking to play just Utah one year and then BYU the next and try to avoid having both the same year as well as their big money game.

[Portland Ute]

I think it has more to do with wanting a game in Southern California every year that is does with the "rivalry". The teams in Oregon and Washington want that trip to So. Cal as well for recruiting purposes. Plus, if the Pac-12 votes that they will not share the T.V. revenue equally, that will be another reason to want the So. Cal teams on their schedule because will be televised games.

If they do a 9 game conference schedule something will have to give. I think it might end up being on the USU end. I know for a fact that USU doesn't want to play both BYU and Utah every season. They have there big money game (Oklahoma this season) and the BYU and Utah on their schedule that are pretty 3 guaranteed loses. I was told by a member of the Utah St coaching staff that they are looking to play just Utah one year and then BYU the next and try to avoid having both the same year as well as their big money game.

Everything you and Top Ute mention can be accomplished with a zipper format plus 2 more road games against the other division.

8 games is where it needs to be.

Playing 6 more games needlessly GUARANTEES 6 more losses in the conference. It's a really dumb idea.

[Donuthole]

The idea of a 9-game conference schedule is beyond repulsive. It's a hindrance to the objectives sought by expanding to 12 teams. And it pisses me off to no end that people think USC-Stanford and UCLA-Cal are "rivalries" that must be "protected."

Beggars can't be choosers. Utah will take what it gets and like it. And Utah and Colorado fans had probably get used to that approach, because that's the amount of respect and "say" they're going to get in the PAC-10 from now until forever. You bring up a good point though: if the PAC-10 could go back and do it all over again, they'd stick at 10 teams and call it good.

[LA Ute]

Beggars can't be choosers. Utah will take what it gets and like it. And Utah and Colorado fans had probably get used to that approach, because that's the amount of respect and "say" they're going to get in the PAC-10 from now until forever. You bring up a good point though: if the PAC-10 could go back and do it all over again, they'd stick at 10 teams and call it good.

And it's a good thing BYU didn't get invited and have to deal with all this. I bet you guys are all breathing sighs of relief.

[Hot Lunch]

Everything you and Top Ute mention can be accomplished with a zipper format plus 2 more road games against the other division.

8 games is where it needs to be.

Playing 6 more games needlessly GUARANTEES 6 more losses in the conference. It's a really dumb idea.

8 games is where it needs to be and that is what I want it to be but it won't accomplish a game in So. Cal every year. Maybe every other year but not every year which is what the schools want.

[Top Ute]

8 games is where it needs to be and that is what I want it to be but it won't accomplish a game in So. Cal every year. Maybe every other year but not every year which is what the schools want.

Every school in the Big 12 North plays at least one game in Texas every year. So the Pac-10 schools that would be in a Pac-North division can't say the balance of power would tilt to the South, like it has in the Big 12, without yearly appearances in SoCal.

Oregon and Washington's fears of being turned into Iowa State or Missouri simply aren't founded. Now Washington State has something to fear, I suppose, but their problems were exposed long before expansion.

Give us eight conference games, and it's not difficult to find ways into SoCal in years where you don't play at USC or UCLA.

[DU Ute]

And it's a good thing BYU didn't get invited and have to deal with all this. I bet you guys are all breathing sighs of relief.

[SeattleUte]

Beggars can't be choosers. Utah will take what it gets and like it. And Utah and Colorado fans had probably get used to that approach, because that's the amount of respect and "say" they're going to get in the PAC-10 from now until forever. You bring up a good point though: if the PAC-10 could go back and do it all over again, they'd stick at 10 teams and call it good.

You're making stuff up.

[OrangeUte]

I'm having a family beach vacation this week here in So Cal, and while out running in the morning I happened to be wearing a Utah t-shirt. As I circled the little island we are on I ran past many a vacationer in Stanford, USC, Cal, and UCLA gear. They all smiled and said "welcome." That was pretty cool.

i went for an early morning run today since i've missed quite a bit of my usual runs the last 2 weeks. after i finished, i was walking back to my car and a guy came up and said "welcome to the pac 10". i was wearing a ute running shirt. i said thanks and asked him if he followed PAC 10 sports. he told me that he is an oregon grad and life long duck fan. he was very cool about utah coming into the fold. i agree, it was pretty cool.

[SeattleUte]

i went for an early morning run today since i've missed quite a bit of my usual runs the last 2 weeks. after i finished, i was walking back to my car and a guy came up and said "welcome to the pac 10". i was wearing a ute running shirt. i said thanks and asked him if he followed PAC 10 sports. he told me that he is an oregon grad and life long duck fan. he was very cool about utah coming into the fold. i agree, it was pretty cool.

I experience nothing but this kind of reaction. The Pac 10 knew what it was doing, and, as AA said, the die was cast for a long time. Now they are working out the details, but everyone is happy and excited about the expansion and new venues.

[LA Ute]

This is a nice piece by the Chair of the Utah State Board of Regents, David Jordan:

My view: Athletics, academics make University of Utah a perfect fit for the Pac-10

[SeattleUte]

Donut a-hole: here is what they are saying about the Pac 10+2 in Pac country:

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/ua/articles/2010/07/24/20100724pac-10-conference-change-bickley.html

Also, how about that "12-Pac" for the new name? Pretty clever, eh?

[Donuthole]

Donut a-hole: here is what they are saying about the Pac 10+2 in Pac country:

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/ua/articles/2010/07/24/20100724pac-10-conference-change-bickley.html

Also, how about that "12-Pac" for the new name? Pretty clever, eh?

Of course they are saying that in Arizona. Aside from being more LDS than many MWC venues, the two AZ schools are perennial bottom-feeders in the PAC-10. They are hoping(praying?) that the addition of some new schools put an end to the Califorina-centric nature the conference.

I didn't realize my comments would ruffle so many feathers. I thought you Utes had thicker skin than that.

[Surfah]

Of course they are saying that in Arizona. Aside from being more LDS than many MWC venues, the two AZ schools are perennial bottom-feeders in the PAC-10. They are hoping(praying?) that the addition of some new schools put an end to the Califorina-centric nature the conference.

I didn't realize my comments would ruffle so many feathers. I thought you Utes had thicker skin than that.

I agree with your earlier post. I'd say the Pac-10 is split about 50-50 on Utah at best. Certainly not the everyone is happy about the expansion and venues that SU thinks. I especially agree that if the Pac-10 could take a mulligan they would and stand pat at 10.