The PAC 10 expansion groundswell

[ERCougar]

I scan the board simply because it's the quickest way to find the latest tweets.

Right. Because this thread has been so dormant.

I don't even look at CB anymore. And the only time I've ever looked at utefans is when someone links something here. And most of the time I don't even bother.

[Blueintheface]

It would be kind of funny if in the end Utah gets promoted to the Pac-10 and ends up bouncing between the Holiday bowl and Sun Bowl every year, while BYU gets left behind in a MWC that finally gets an autobid, so BYU goes BCS every other year.

Add to that the reaction of the average ute fan wanting quickly to dispel any rumors that it represents the LDS church in order to appear on equal footing within conference and you've got a recipe for bastard child. I hope that somehow the Utes can maintain their dignity if not their heritage through all this and represent this state well. Cougar fans need only soften the blow by admitting realignment defeat and wait patiently for their time.

[ERCougar]

Are you making this up as you go?

lol you deny Utah even has any BCS wins.

ER, our walking CB.

You might want to try reading again. Practice makes perfect.

If only there were a NYT book review of my posts to help you out...

[scottie]

Surely this question has been asked in this thread already, but I ain't searching for it. If you're a Ute fan, which option do you prefer?:

A. Stay in a new MWC that has Kansas, Kansas St., Missouri, and Boise St.
B. Go to the new PAC that has the Texas schools + Oklahoma

I'd say option A if you're more interested in football/basketball success, but there is a coolness factor in option B.

[U-Ute]

OK, now they've come back with an updated rumor backing Joe Schad's "Texas +3 to the Pac-10" report. They do note Chip Brown's report without comment. This was interesting:

It is fun to have both ChipBrown and Joe Schad tweets coming to my phone. Especially when they both tweet conflicting info at the exact same time. That happened 2 or 3 times on saturday.

[Uncle Ted]

ESPN Insider Rumor Central speculating as to whether or not the SEC really wants or can take aTm. They note CNBC sports business reporter Darren Rovell's tweet Monday that if he were officials from Florida or Alabama, he'd tell SEC commissioner Mike Slive that adding Texas A&M to the league doesn't make sense from a financial perspective.

They then highlight the following points:

• The SEC is currently in great shape, with a lucrative long-term TV deal and an on-field dominance (four BCS champions in a row)
• The conference would want to add another school at the same time in order to have two balanced seven-team divisions (it might be tough to whittle down a 13-team group to a conference title game). While plenty of schools have been suggested as possibilities (Kansas, Virginia Tech, Miami and Florida State, to name a few), there hasn't been any definitive evidence indicating that the SEC would be happy to add any of those programs.
• In any event, A&M will need to know and decide soon, or else risk being left behind with the remaining Big 12 teams.

I kind of agree with this idea for the SEC...

But 14 teams is too many. Twelve is the perfect number for a conference. So, the SEC should eliminate Arkansas and South Carolina from its league before adding two new ones. Arkansas and South Carolina have never really fit anyway. Neither has won an SEC Championship Game. South Carolina has not even made the game. Neither state is a hotbed of recruits. So adding those two actually hurt the other 10 because it meant more recruiting battles.

I think the Big 12 (aka. Texas) will let Arkansas come back to the fold. It has been long enough that the prodigal son has been gone. Set the table and roast the fatted hog.

[USUC]

Surely this question has been asked in this thread already, but I ain't searching for it. If you're a Ute fan, which option do you prefer?:

A. Stay in a new MWC that has Kansas, Kansas St., Missouri, and Boise St.
B. Go to the new PAC that has the Texas school

I'd say option A if you're more interested in football/basketball success, but there is a coolness factor in option B.

I don't see the Kansas Schools or Missouri going to the MWC. I just don't see it. I hope I'm wrong but Basketball rules the day in Kansas, and why wouldn't they go to the Big East?

[LiveCoug]

I don't see the Kansas Schools or Missouri going to the MWC. I just don't see it. I hope I'm wrong but Basketball rules the day in Kansas, and why wouldn't they go to the Big East?

The only reason they go to the MWC and not the BE would be because the BE doesn't invite them.

[LA Ute]

Surely this question has been asked in this thread already, but I ain't searching for it. If you're a Ute fan, which option do you prefer?:

A. Stay in a new MWC that has Kansas, Kansas St., Missouri, and Boise St.
B. Go to the new PAC that has the Texas schools + Oklahoma

I'd say option A if you're more interested in football/basketball success, but there is a coolness factor in option B.

In addition to coolness, there's supposed to be $20 million a year in it for the PAC16 schools, if the Larry Scott TV deal happens. So, as much as I wish it were not so, the U. has to look at the money. (I don't think the PAC16 will happen, BTW.)

[LA Ute]

I don't think this is at all unlikely. I'm telling you--any new BCS deal, especially without the megaconference scenario, but even without it, will include the MWC, particularly if TCU and BSU go off this year, like their rosters and schedules say they should.

I'd still rather be in the PAC 10, with the venues and teams on the regular schedule and the money coming in every year, but this will be the end of Utah's BCS run.

Lots of college football soothsayers (and there sure are a lot of those these days) say the MWC doesn't get AQ status without Utah in it. Now, if Kansas and some other Big 12 leftovers join, I think it would get AQ status.

Whatever. No one knows. Not even you, you warthog-faced buffoon.

[LA Ute]

It would be kind of funny if in the end Utah gets promoted to the Pac-10 and ends up bouncing between the Holiday bowl and Sun Bowl every year, while BYU gets left behind in a MWC that finally gets an autobid, so BYU goes BCS every other year.

This is the "feel-better" prayer of many BYU fans. And it might happen. It also might happen that Utah will be 4th-place in the PACXX and play BYU, the MWC champ, in the Vegas Bowl. That might not feel so good for either side.

[il Padrino Ute]

It would be kind of funny if in the end Utah gets promoted to the Pac-10 and ends up bouncing between the Holiday bowl and Sun Bowl every year, while BYU gets left behind in a MWC that finally gets an autobid, so BYU goes BCS every other year.

Anyone who would think that the BCS would allow the MWC into their little club is delusional. There is simply not enough money generated to garner the interest of those that run the BCS to open the doors for the MWC.

[U-Ute]

Anyone who would think that the BCS would allow the MWC into their little club is delusional. There is simply not enough money generated to garner the interest of those that run the BCS to open the doors for the MWC.

What do you mean? BYU has millions of fans that tune in every week on their rabbit-eared B&W Zenith they bought in 1982.

[USUC]

In addition to coolness, there's supposed to be $20 million a year in it for the PAC16 schools, if the Larry Scott TV deal happens. So, as much as I wish it were not so, the U. has to look at the money. (I don't think the PAC16 will happen, BTW.)

How much money would a 12 team Pac conference make? I guess they get a couple of new television markets and a championship game, but it is nothing like the amount of money that would come in if Texas were in the picture.

[U-Ute]

How much money would a 12 team Pac conference make? I guess they get a couple of new television markets and a championship game, but it is nothing like the amount of money that would come in if Texas were in the picture.

But it is still a helluva lot more than the MWC gets out of the mtn contract.