The PAC 10 expansion groundswell

[YOhio]

Oh, shut up.

Sorry guys...revoke my SoonerLonghornUte status if you have to, but nobody, and I mean nobody, thinks of Utah as a basketball school.

:stirthepot:

[Moliere]

with its proud basketball program and proximity to the Kansas City market.

Yep, better basketball program by enough tiers to make up for a flash in the pan recently successful football program. I'd say that is at least two tiers if not three.

I'll say it again, Kansas invented basketball, or better put the inventor of basketball perfected the game while coaching there. Utah can't hold Kansas' jock strap when it comes to basketball.

[YOhio]

Today a caller on The Dayton Sports Scene on 1410 ESPN Radio said that the MWC should make a strong push to get Kansas and New Mexico. That way with BYU and Utah's basketball programs we could have a nice hoops conference. I thought the addition of New Mexico was a pretty interesting idea.

[Coach McGuirk]

Utes window closed? Seems like it.

Another source with knowledge of the situation confirmed to ESPN.com's Andy Katz that Texas A&M was looking at the SEC, but the source said he is convinced the Aggies will end up in the Pac-10.
The source said the SEC consideration was fueled by "ego purposes" within Texas A&M, that the Aggies' power brokers sought distance from the Texas decision and didn't want to convey the appearance they were doing everything because of Texas.

[BlueHair]

This article says that Larry Scott is flying to each school it intends to invite from the Big 12. Apparently Its second choice behind A&M is Kansas.

http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews....-to-pac-1.html

Dear God,

We know you are not a big fan of Mormons, so please stay consistent and make sure it is Kansas that is invited. Utah has almost as many Mormons as BYU.

Thanks in advance,

The Evangelists

[Flystripper]

LOL. If Kansas comes to the MWC, they will go years without losing a conference game in basketball. No other teams will sniff a conference championship unless K-State also comes.

we better not invite Lamar to our conference then

[LiveCoug]

Listened to the Monty show on the way home. Said the MWC is what it is and that it's BYU and Utah's own fault that they are in the MWC. Says that's where they want to be and if they wanted to be in a big conference, they should have just gone to the PAC 10. Made it sound like that's all they need to do. LOL. What a moron. The caller tried to tell him that they have both been trying for years, Monty didn't believe him. He believes that the Utah schools are content with the MWC. LOL. It was funny.

[DU Ute]

Listened to the Monty show on the way home. Said the MWC is what it is and that it's BYU and Utah's own fault that they are in the MWC. Says that's where they want to be and if they wanted to be in a big conference, they should have just gone to the PAC 10. Made it sound like that's all they need to do. LOL. What a moron. The caller tried to tell him that they have both been trying for years, Monty didn't believe him. He believes that the Utah schools are content with the MWC. LOL. It was funny.

Who is Monty?

[LiveCoug]

Who is Monty?

I dunno.. some blowhard national guy who thinks he's all that.

[Uncle Ted]

The following is very interesting analysis of what the new Pac-16 might look like compared to the new Big Ten and SEC that was posted on another board. Note that the new Pac-16 includes Utah.

Given the chaos that has unfolded over the last 2 weeks, many on this board have expressed concern about what might unfold if A&M should make a move to the SEC. As the line of reasoning goes, the SEC is the dominant conference in college football and any incursion into the region by the SEC will result in a weakened Texas. Many have claimed the new Pac 16 will not be as strong of a conference.

I decided to compile some statistics and see if history bears these ideas out. I obtained the final AP Top 25 rankings since 1997. I looked at the positions of teams in the Big 10, Big 12, PAC 10, and SEC and tabulated the number of teams that were ranked at the end of each year.

      B10 B12 PAC SEC
1997    4   5   4   6
1998    5   5   2   4
1999    7   4   1   7
2000    3   5   3   6 
2001    2   4   4   5
2002    4   4   2   3
2003    5   4   2   5
2004    4   3   3   4
2005    3   4   4   5
2006    4   2   3   6
2007    4   5   4   5
2008    4   5   3   4
2009    4   3   2   4
Tot:   53  53  37  64

Rather unsurprisingly, the SEC does indeed have the largest number of Top 25 finishes at 64. And indeed, the Pac 10 is languishing in comparison to the other conferences. However, what is being overlooked is the COMBINED strength of the Pac 10 and the Big 12 South is a very powerful conference in its own right.

I have run the scenario that NU goes to the Big 10, CU, TT, UT, OSU, OU, and Utah go to the Pac 16, and A&M and Clemson join the SEC. This results in the following finishes:

     B10 PAC SEC
1997   5   5   7
1998   6   3   5
1999   8   2   8
2000   4   5   7
2001   3   7   5
2002   4   5   3
2003   6   5   6
2004   4   7   4
2005   4   7   6
2006   4   5   6
2007   4   7   6
2008   4   8   4
2009   5   5   5
Tot:  61  71  72

Now the results become more interesting, especially when you consider since 2000, there were 5 years in which more Pac 16 teams were ranked than SEC (+TAMU and CLEM) teams, and only 3 years in which more SEC teams were ranked than Pac 16.

Since the total number of teams ranked doesn’t really speak to the quality of football played (as you might be skewed by a large number of lower ranked teams), I compared the top 3 finishers in each year for the Big 10 (+NU), Pac 16, and SEC (Tamu and Clem). Lower is better here as a measure of top-end quality:

     B10 P16 SEC
1997   5   9   7
1998   7   9   6
1999   4  20  10
2000  11   3  16
2001  13   4   5
2002   6   5   9
2003   6   4   7
2004  13   3   7
2005   7   5   8
2006   6   9   4
2007  14   7   5 
2008  12   3   7
2009   7  11   7

This analysis reveals that the average finish of the top 3 teams in the Pac 16 exceeds that of the SEC 14 7 times in the ten years since 2000.

It is, of course, possible to counter that with more teams to select from (16 vs 14) and more teams playing in a different conference over the time period in question (6 vs 2) that these results would tend to skew the results in favor of the Pac 10. But, I think ultimately this is one of the strengths of the Pac 16. With 16 teams to choose from, you can afford a few teams to have down years without killing the overall strength of the conference.

All in all guys, I would conclude that we are entering a very powerful football conference on its own merits that can stand against the SEC. The poll statistics bear that out. I for one am very excited about the new era of Texas football.

[Babs]

Given the chaos that has unfolded over the last 2 weeks, many on this board have expressed concern about what might unfold if A&M should make a move to the SEC. As the line of reasoning goes, the SEC is the dominant conference in college football and any incursion into the region by the SEC will result in a weakened Texas. Many have claimed the new Pac 16 will not be as strong of a conference.

I decided to compile some statistics and see if history bears these ideas out. I obtained the final AP Top 25 rankings since 1997. I looked at the positions of teams in the Big 10, Big 12, PAC 10, and SEC and tabulated the number of teams that were ranked at the end of each year.


Code:

B10 B12 PAC SEC
1997 4 5 4 6
1998 5 5 2 4
1999 7 4 1 7
2000 3 5 3 6
2001 2 4 4 5
2002 4 4 2 3
2003 5 4 2 5
2004 4 3 3 4
2005 3 4 4 5
2006 4 2 3 6
2007 4 5 4 5
2008 4 5 3 4
2009 4 3 2 4
Tot: 53 53 37 64

Rather unsurprisingly, the SEC does indeed have the largest number of Top 25 finishes at 64. And indeed, the Pac 10 is languishing in comparison to the other conferences. However, what is being overlooked is the COMBINED strength of the Pac 10 and the Big 12 South is a very powerful conference in its own right.

I have run the scenario that NU goes to the Big 10, CU, TT, UT, OSU, OU, and Utah go to the Pac 16, and A&M and Clemson join the SEC. This results in the following finishes:

Code:

B10 PAC SEC
1997 5 5 7
1998 6 3 5
1999 8 2 8
2000 4 5 7
2001 3 7 5
2002 4 5 3
2003 6 5 6
2004 4 7 4
2005 4 7 6
2006 4 5 6
2007 4 7 6
2008 4 8 4
2009 5 5 5
Tot: 61 71 72

Now the results become more interesting, especially when you consider since 2000, there were 5 years in which more Pac 16 teams were ranked than SEC (+TAMU and CLEM) teams, and only 3 years in which more SEC teams were ranked than Pac 16.

Since the total number of teams ranked doesn’t really speak to the quality of football played (as you might be skewed by a large number of lower ranked teams), I compared the top 3 finishers in each year for the Big 10 (+NU), Pac 16, and SEC (Tamu and Clem). Lower is better here as a measure of top-end quality:

Code:

B10 P16 SEC
1997 5 9 7
1998 7 9 6
1999 4 20 10
2000 11 3 16
2001 13 4 5
2002 6 5 9
2003 6 4 7
2004 13 3 7
2005 7 5 8
2006 6 9 4
2007 14 7 5
2008 12 3 7
2009 7 11 7

This analysis reveals that the average finish of the top 3 teams in the Pac 16 exceeds that of the SEC 14 7 times in the ten years since 2000.

It is, of course, possible to counter that with more teams to select from (16 vs 14) and more teams playing in a different conference over the time period in question (6 vs 2) that these results would tend to skew the results in favor of the Pac 10. But, I think ultimately this is one of the strengths of the Pac 16. With 16 teams to choose from, you can afford a few teams to have down years without killing the overall strength of the conference.

All in all guys, I would conclude that we are entering a very powerful football conference on its own merits that can stand against the SEC. The poll statistics bear that out. I for one am very excited about the new era of Texas football.

I cannot believe how much time some guys are putting into this stuff.

[Blueintheface]

I cannot believe how much time some guys are putting into this stuff.

I was half-expecting to see something like this from Indy.

[Babs]

I was half-expecting to see something like this from Indy.

I was honestly thinking it was Indy, and wondering what he was doing on a Longhorns board.

[SeattleUte]

If the four from the B12 South really are coming out here (I still can't accept it; it challenges many of my most cherished beliefs and prejudices), I don't see why, even if the convoy includes TAMU and Kansas and K-State, they can't just add the Utes. They want two BCS automatic invitations. Why not have nine or ten teams in a division?

They need us to round out the Rockies.

[SeattleUte]

The following is very interesting analysis of what the new Pac-16 might look like compared to the new Big Ten and SEC that was posted on another board. Note that the new Pac-16 includes Utah.

I still can't believe you signed up for Orangbloods. What a dork.