The PAC 10 expansion groundswell

[myboynoah]

I don't see why the Pac-10+1 would be in a hurry on Utah. Doesn't Utah have until Sept 1st to inform the MWC that they are leaving? If the Pac-10+1 was smart they would take their time and do their due diligence on Utah and figure how much value they didn't gain with Colorado. Maybe they will just cut their loses and let Colorado go to the MWC if they stop and do some actual thinking about it. Of course, I don't take the current Pac-10+1 management as being all that smart.

I read somewhere today that Chip Brown is saying the Big 12 will stay at 10 schools and petition the NCAA for a football championship game with just those 10. That was one of the Pac-10's original options. Wouldn't that be funny if the NCAA grants the Big-12's wish.

[Uncle Ted]

I read somewhere today that Chip Brown is saying the Big 12 will stay at 10 schools and petition the NCAA for a football championship game with just those 10. That was one of the Pac-10's original options. Wouldn't that be funny if the NCAA grants the Big-12's wish.

I saw that in the NY Times as well. Like I said why should the Pac-10+1 be in a hurry? If the Big 12-2 gets their way then I could see the Pac-10+1 becoming the Pac-10 again by getting an annulment with CU and maybe paying their Big-12 buyout fee after the lawsuits settle.

[myboynoah]

I saw that in the NY Times as well. Like I said why should the Pac-10+1 be in a hurry? If the Big 12-2 gets their way then I could see the Pac-10+1 becoming the Pac-10 again by getting an annulment with CU and maybe paying their Big-12 buyout fee after the lawsuits settle.

How can they annul CU? Aside from the huge PR hit, haven't signed an agreement. I actually think the Pac-11 likes CU and sees it as a like-minded member. CU ranks better than most other Pac-11 schools (which isn't that great a feat), so there is some commonality there.

[Flystripper]

I saw that in the NY Times as well. Like I said why should the Pac-10+1 be in a hurry? If the Big 12-2 gets their way then I could see the Pac-10+1 becoming the Pac-10 again by getting an annulment with CU and maybe paying their Big-12 buyout fee after the lawsuits settle.

This is what I said yesterday. The PAC 11 will be in no rush since they may have a small bit of buyers remorse on CU and Utah can be had at any time.

[USUC]

I read somewhere today that Chip Brown is saying the Big 12 will stay at 10 schools and petition the NCAA for a football championship game with just those 10. That was one of the Pac-10's original options. Wouldn't that be funny if the NCAA grants the Big-12's wish.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around a conference championship with only 10 teams. Every team has already played one another. So why give a school another chance to beat the top dog? I realize this still happens with a 12 team conference championship, but its less likely. Meeting a team for the second time favors the team that lost in my mind. I'm getting comfortable with the idea that the Big-12 doesn't want to bring in teams that will decrease their revenue. But trying to have your cake and eat it to with a championship game makes no sense to me.

[beefytee]

I have a hard time wrapping my head around a conference championship with only 10 teams. Every team has already played one another. So why give a school another chance to beat the top dog? I realize this still happens with a 12 team conference championship, but its less likely. Meeting a team for the second time favors the team that lost in my mind. I'm getting comfortable with the idea that the Big-12 doesn't want to bring in teams that will decrease their revenue. But trying to have your cake and eat it to with a championship game makes no sense to me.

I don't see any way they get the vote unless the Pac-11 stays at eleven. The Big 10 won't go for it. They just expanded to have a championship game.

[myboynoah]

I have a hard time wrapping my head around a conference championship with only 10 teams. Every team has already played one another. So why give a school another chance to beat the top dog? I realize this still happens with a 12 team conference championship, but its less likely. Meeting a team for the second time favors the team that lost in my mind. I'm getting comfortable with the idea that the Big-12 doesn't want to bring in teams that will decrease their revenue. But trying to have your cake and eat it to with a championship game makes no sense to me.

Yeah, I guess for the money. I thought it was odd since I'd heard the Big-12 schools didn't think the championship game worked out all that well, so they wanted to avoid it.

I guess with 10 schools and an eight game schedule, one pairing would not meet during the regular schedule. A championship game would solve that problem. But I really think it is about the money.

[USUC]

Yeah, I guess for the money. I thought it was odd since I'd heard the Big-12 schools didn't think the championship game worked out all that well, so they wanted to avoid it.

I guess with 10 schools and an eight game schedule, one pairing would not meet during the regular schedule. A championship game would solve that problem. But I really think it is about the money.

It is all about money. But if the PAC-11 is willing to bring in CU and Utah to get a championship game, you'd think that a championship game is worth it for the money. The Big-10 is going to 12 as well. That means the Big East and the Big 12-2 will be the only BCS leagues to not have a championship game. Not good company to be in. The Big-12-2 now has more money with only 10 teams than the PAC-10 will with the new teams and a championship game. So why wouldn't the Big-12-2 want more money. Just because Stoops and Brown don't like the championship game doesn't mean it should be gone.

[LA Ute]

Like I've said from the beginning of this thread, I'm just trying to keep you all grounded. Larry Scott publicity stunt, Larry Scott got what he wanted all along, both organizations wound up richer.

[Uncle Ted]

Yeah, I guess for the money. I thought it was odd since I'd heard the Big-12 schools didn't think the championship game worked out all that well, so they wanted to avoid it.

The coaches don't like the championship game. Yet another tough game they have to get ready for and maybe in short order if the division champion is determined late in the season. Sometimes you have to play the same team twice. They also believe it is hard on the players.

I guess with 10 schools and an eight game schedule, one pairing would not meet during the regular schedule. A championship game would solve that problem. But I really think it is about the money.

It is the networks and fans that like it and will pay for it. A championship game will pay $10M to $15M for a conference like the SEC or Big 12. If you think about it a BCS bowl may only pay a few million more back to the conference.

[Flystripper]

The coaches don't like the championship game. Yet another tough game they have to get ready for and maybe in short order if the division champion is determined late in the season. Sometimes you have to play the same team twice. They also believe it is hard on the players.



It is the networks and fans that like it and will pay for it. A championship game will pay $10M to $15M for a conference like the SEC or Big 12. If you think about it a BCS bowl may only pay a few million more back to the conference.

A championship game has not hurt the SEC much lately. All that sounds like needless whining when you remember that the SEC plays one.

[Uncle Ted]

It is all about money. But if the PAC-11 is willing to bring in CU and Utah to get a championship game, you'd think that a championship game is worth it for the money. The Big-10 is going to 12 as well. That means the Big East and the Big 12-2 will be the only BCS leagues to not have a championship game. Not good company to be in. The Big-12-2 now has more money with only 10 teams than the PAC-10 will with the new teams and a championship game. So why wouldn't the Big-12-2 want more money. Just because Stoops and Brown don't like the championship game doesn't mean it should be gone.

When expanding to 12 teams to get a championship game you have to bring in teams that are worth something and add value to make it work in the books. While the championship game may be worth, say, $15M to add two teams to the Big 12-2 may cost $12M to $14M per year each in shared revenue. So is a BYU or an Utah worth at least the difference? Do they add about $5M of value to the conference? Apparently the Big 12 thought Colorado didn't add any value to the conference but the Pac-10 thinks otherwise.

Of course, in the Big 12-2 they don't pay each team the same amount so what stops them from offering BYU and some other team something less than $14M/yr each?

[jay santos]

When expanding to 12 teams to get a championship game you have to bring in teams that are worth something and add value to make it work in the books. While the championship game may be worth, say, $15M to add two teams to the Big 12-2 may cost $12M to $14M per year each in shared revenue. So is a BYU or an Utah worth at least the difference? Do they add about $5M of value to the conference? Apparently the Big 12 thought Colorado didn't add any value to the conference but the Pac-10 thinks otherwise.

Of course, in the Big 12-2 they don't pay each team the same amount so what stops them from offering BYU and some other team something less than $14M/yr each?

I would think the finances of adding BYU and one other team to 10 team Big 12 would be very similar to finances of adding Colo and Utah to Pac 10.

I doubt if the Pac's going to be better off. I think they got caught up with their bit about copying the Big 10 and thought they had to expand just for the sake of expansion and to get a championship game.

The Big 12 doesn't have motivation like that, in fact the opposite as they have a bad taste in their mouths over splitting to divisions and having a championship game.

[Uncle Ted]

I would think the finances of adding BYU and one other team to 10 team Big 12 would be very similar to finances of adding Colo and Utah to Pac 10.

The Pac-10 divides their revenue evenly. So I wouldn't say they are very similar. The Big 12-2 could bring a BYU and some other team in for $10M/yr. BYU would easily add more than $2.5M in value, I believe, to make it a positive net gain for the Big 12-2. I think the Big 12-2 will wait for a while. Maybe see how BYU sells out the Royal in Austin and does on the field next year before giving them an invite. (So BYU fans plan to buy your Texas vs. BYU tickets the minute they go on sale and make travel arrangements to Austin now. I'll hitch up the smoker and meet you there.)

I doubt if the Pac's going to be better off. I think they got caught up with their bit about copying the Big 10 and thought they had to expand just for the sake of expansion and to get a championship game.

The Big 12 doesn't have motivation like that, in fact the opposite as they have a bad taste in their mouths over splitting to divisions and having a championship game.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Pac-10+1 holds off a bit from expanding. Maybe watch how the Big 12-2's petition to the NCAA to get a championship game with only 10 teams plays (if this has any truth).

[beefytee]

The Pac-10 divides their revenue evenly.

No they don't.

link:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...uwmoney24.html