The PAC 10 expansion groundswell

[pellegrino]

I have a theory that expansion rumors always turn out to be true except when they involve BYU. Does anyone have facts to refute this? (No doubt you can guess my theory for why BYU would be the exception. Of course your experience in 1994 constitutes solid facts supporting this part of the theory.)

Not so with the ACC expansion a few years back. There were all sorts of rumors flying around, especially with Syracuse. A lot of people I knew at Carolina thought that Syracuse was a done deal and that VT didn't have a chance because it didn't enhance TV markets. In the end though Syracuse and its large NY market was left out in the cold.

[SeattleUte]

3D, Ted what's his face says it's 50-50 Pac 10 expands. He had thought 60-40, so I think he's probably leaning more for than against. What do you think this really means (reading between the lines)? I note you said he's very careful about not going out on a limb.

[TripletDaddy]

3D, Ted what's his face says it's 50-50 Pac 10 expands. He had thought 60-40, so I think he's probably leaning more for than against. What do you think this really means (reading between the lines)? I note you said he's very careful about not going out on a limb.

Without seeing the blog post to which you refer, I am unable to discern whether a shift from 60/40 to 50/50 is a good thing. I trust your interpretation that his confidence level is creeping upwards. As I said before, Miller is generally a very credible source for the PAC. He isn't big on prediction/wild speculation pieces, most of his blog entries are updates and straight news (stats from training camp, here is what Coach X said about the game, here is an injury report, etc).

As I stated earlier, I would and do look to Miller as a lodestar for this whole deal. If his confidence level is increasing, this means that he has been in discussion either directly with the PAC offices or with PAC coaches. If I had to do a quick-and-dirty read between the lines, I would say that the increase in confidence makes sense....just off the heels of the BCS meetings in which the B10 not only acknowledges being serious about expansion, but the SEC rocks the room by announcing a thinly-veiled threat to expand BEYOND 12 teams if the B10 goes to 14. This all but assures expansion for the PAC. The big question is still the teams that will be involved.

This is all speculation on my part, of course. But Ute fans should be excited if Miller is jocking this movement. I trust him way more than Colin Cowherd.

[SeattleUte]

Without seeing the blog post to which you refer, I am unable to discern whether a shift from 60/40 to 50/50 is a good thing. I trust your interpretation that his confidence level is creeping upwards. As I said before, Miller is generally a very credible source for the PAC. He isn't big on prediction/wild speculation pieces, most of his blog entries are updates and straight news (stats from training camp, here is what Coach X said about the game, here is an injury report, etc).

As I stated earlier, I would and do look to Miller as a lodestar for this whole deal. If his confidence level is increasing, this means that he has been in discussion either directly with the PAC offices or with PAC coaches. If I had to do a quick-and-dirty read between the lines, I would say that the increase in confidence makes sense....just off the heels of the BCS meetings in which the B10 not only acknowledges being serious about expansion, but the SEC rocks the room by announcing a thinly-veiled threat to expand BEYOND 12 teams if the B10 goes to 14. This all but assures expansion for the PAC. The big question is still the teams that will be involved.

This is all speculation on my part, of course. But Ute fans should be excited if Miller is jocking this movement. I trust him way more than Colin Cowherd.

FYI, he has dropped from 60/40 to 50/50. But with a straight laced guy like him I thought even 60/40/50/50 was interesting. FWIW, he was surley about the subject. Told a guy from Salt Lake he wasn't going to let anyone turn the discussion into an expansion forum because there wasn't anything to talk about right now. Fits your description of him.

But no one is commenting on the appointment of UW Pres. Mark Emmert to head the NCAA. That has to be a HUGE development for better or worse re Pac 10 expansion. I believe he's been all for it. The UW coaches have spoken out in favor of it. Do you know anything about Emmert's bias?

[PaloAltoCougar]

May I interject that I'm finding all these references to "the PAC" both distracting and misleading. I am the PAC, dammit. The Pacific-10 Conference is a PAC.

[LA Ute]

May I interject that I'm finding all these references to "the PAC" both distracting and misleading. I am the PAC, dammit. The Pacific-10 Conference is a PAC.

May we refer to you as PAC-1? Or maybe that is too confusing. How about The One PAC? The One True PAC?

[LA Ute]

This will gladden the hearts of Ute fans (from Chat with Ted Miller - SportsNation - ESPN):

Steve (Pasadena)


If Utah and Colorado were in the Pac-10 this year, how do you think they would compete? Would they be near top, mid, or bottom of the conference

Ted Miller (3:25 PM)


This past year, Utah would have been in the mix below Oregon and Colorado would have been ninth. But Colorado has won before and will win again. And Utah's got a coach who really, really knows what he's doing. Both would do fine in the Pac-10.

Cool. I am having trouble embedding the link. Here's the link text:

<http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/32095>

[PaloAltoCougar]

May we refer to you as PAC-1? Or maybe that is too confusing. How about The One PAC? The One True PAC?

Those are all excellent ideas, particularly the last. However, I just reached an agreement with conference officials granting them a nontransferable license to the PAC acronym, so people can use the term without fear of litigation or condemnation from me.

BTW, the license includes royalty payments and other consideration, including a negative covenant that forbids their admitting any institution founded by Brigham Young.

[TripletDaddy]

May I interject that I'm finding all these references to "the PAC" both distracting and misleading. I am the PAC, dammit. The Pacific-10 Conference is a PAC.

I thought all of this IS about you?!

PAC is expanding.
PAC growth inevitable
PAC elitism
etc

Someone fill me in. What is the Pacific 10 Conference doing?

[Hot Lunch]

Miller did another post about Pac 10 expansion this morning. This time it is all about Colorado being a good fit.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_...e-for-colorado

[SeattleUte]

Miller did another post about Pac 10 expansion this morning. This time it is all about Colorado being a good fit.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_...e-for-colorado

NOT TRUE. The last part is about Utah. Anyway, the only thing holding Utah back from Pac 10 celestial glory is a worthy mate.

Also, note, this last statement about stretching for running with a pac 10 expansion story is the kind of sign 3D has been looking for from Miller.

[Hot Lunch]

NOT TRUE. The last part is about Utah. Anyway, the only thing holding Utah back from Pac 10 celestial glory is a worthy mate.

Also, note, this last statement about stretching for running with a pac 10 expansion story is the kind of sign 3D has been looking for from Miller.

You are right, Utah was mentioned in it as well. The more I read the more I think this is actually going to happen. Not sure about the June 11 thing but I am finally starting to think the Pac 10 will indeed expand.

[SeattleUte]

This is the first reference I can see predicting the pac 10 not wanting BYU for intangible reasons regardless of fan base, money, etc. (There may be earlier ones on Utefans.) This BYU fan was prophetic!

http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...html?id=368917

[falafel]

This is the first reference I can see predicting the pac 10 not wanting BYU for intangible reasons regardless of fan base, money, etc. (There may be earlier ones on Utefans.) This BYU fan was prophetic!

http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...html?id=368917

Wow! Even you agree with you.

[Art Vandelay]

This is the first reference I can see predicting the pac 10 not wanting BYU for intangible reasons regardless of fan base, money, etc. (There may be earlier ones on Utefans.) This BYU fan was prophetic!

http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...html?id=368917

Catblue? You are quoting Catblue?!?! Whatever happened to that blowhard? My guess is he is some pretend fan who drinks fruity drinks with umbrellas, does yoga and likely doesn't even own a TV. Thank goodness that guy disappeared into the vapor never to be heard from again.