On CU going to the Pac 10(12)...

[U-Ute]

Personally, I like Red-Legger. He has a funny accent.

If BYU sticks it out and lands with a better deal than Utah in the B12-2+2 (Texas students can use their calculators for that), I'll be happy for BYU. As it stands now, for Utah, it is a much better deal to be in the PAC-10+2 than the MWC. That's all I care about.

U-Ute

[Red Legger]

It is a good time to join the Pac 10.

I could see them winning a MNC their first year in it (w/ division partners like the Buffs and Arizona State). The problem is the Pac 10 operates like MWC financially (or Big 10 for that matter). That one for all and all for one mentality. Oregon State Athletics is dam near broke( http://www.oregonlive.com/education/...ty_and_un.html ). Wazzu is a hopeless basketcase and Arizona State is heading there. I tend to believe these problems are a bit deeper than OSU accountants and WSU/ASU coaching. Changes are coming to college athletics:

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/06/27...ld-arrive.html

You don't fight the next war w/ the last war's technology. As self-centered and conniving as the Tejan$ have shown themselves, they're already 3 or 4 steps ahead of everyone else. Imagine hapless Mizzou and the old Big 8 schools creating a sub-league cable teevee network inside of the Big 12 through Learfield Communications sponsored by Phillups 66? Do you think Notre Dame isn't intrigued by the idea of keeping its NBC contract and playing Big 12 football? Or BYU and its LDS congregations all over the country?

Rock Chalk Jayhawk, Beat Mizzou

[Uncle Ted]

I could see them winning a MNC their first year in it (w/ division partners like the Buffs and Arizona State). The problem is the Pac 10 operates like MWC financially (or Big 10 for that matter). That one for all and all for one mentality.

The Pac-10 actually doesn't share the revenue "cake" completely even, from what I understand.

The Pac-10 has what commissioner Tom Hansen refers to as "hybrid" revenue sharing. The conference shares postseason revenue for football bowl games and the NCAA men's basketball tournament.

However, football TV revenue — one of the biggest moneymakers for schools each year — is not shared. Instead, the participating team or teams keep the lion's share of the money, essentially splitting 59.5 percent. The other 40 percent is shared evenly among the other teams. For non-conference games, the participating team keeps its entire share of the money.

Last year USC received nearly $12M and WSU only got $6M. In short, in the Pac-10 every buddy gets an equal size piece of the shared revenue "cake" but the football revenue "icing" on the each school's piece varies a lot.

Now, where it really gets interesting is apparently Utah doesn't get full size piece of the shared Pac-10 revenue cake until the 2014-2015 season. Colorado, however, gets a full size piece as soon as they join the Pac-10 (whenever that may be):

Colorado was invited to become an immediate full-revenue sharing partner in the Pac-10. Utah was not.

Utah, which will join the Pac-10 in 2011, agreed to a three-year timetable before it earns a full-revenue share.

If BYU is invited to the Big 12 I wouldn't be surprised if we see a similar "revenue ramp-up" timetable as well.

[LA Ute]

Do you think Notre Dame isn't intrigued by the idea of keeping its NBC contract and playing Big 12 football? Or BYU and its LDS congregations all over the country?

Maybe they can go back to showing the BYU home games in stake centers. They can't charge admission but imagine the revenue from bake sales at hundreds of buildings around the USA. (Maybe Canada too. Not soo sure about Mexico and Central America.)

[Portland Ute]

Personally, I like Red-Legger. He has a funny accent.

If BYU sticks it out and lands with a better deal than Utah in the B12-2+2 (Texas students can use their calculators for that), I'll be happy for BYU. As it stands now, for Utah, it is a much better deal to be in the PAC-10+2 than the MWC. That's all I care about.

U-Ute

I don't think being the in Big12 would be a better deal. Why would it be so?

If given both options, I'd take the PAC10. The Wasatch Front is a LONG way from the Big12-2.

[U-Ute]

I don't think being the in Big12 would be a better deal. Why would it be so?

I don't necessarily think that they would have a better deal, but if things fall BYU's way, there will be plenty that will paint it so. I'm just letting it be known right now: I really don't care. I'd be happy for them.

If given both options, I'd take the PAC10. The Wasatch Front is a LONG way from the Big12-2.

I agree. Plus, when the whole "Texas 4 to the PAC-10" was going on, I wasn't sure of what headaches being in a conference with Texas and the way they threw their weight around would happen. Don't get me wrong, I would've been thrilled being out of the Zombie Zone of non-AQ, but I think we're better off without the Texas 4 and the PAC-16.

U-Ute

[Portland Ute]

I don't necessarily think that they would have a better deal, but if things fall BYU's way, there will be plenty that will paint it so. I'm just letting it be known right now: I really don't care. I'd be happy for them.



I agree. Plus, when the whole "Texas 4 to the PAC-10" was going on, I wasn't sure of what headaches being in a conference with Texas and the way they threw their weight around would happen. Don't get me wrong, I would've been thrilled being out of the Zombie Zone of non-AQ, but I think we're better off without the Texas 4 and the PAC-16.

U-Ute

I stop short of you on point #1. I don't care. I'm not going to be happy or sad. Actually, I think it would be best for U of U athletics if BYU stays in the MWC or goes indy. SO, I guess I would border on disappointed.

On point #2, I wholly agree. WHen it sounded like we might be in a PAC16 in a division with Texas, I really was disappointed. I mean, it was a life raft, but it wasn't the dream that I had dreamed. It was avoiding disaster in the non-AQ wasteland, but it wasn't road trips to the Pacific Northwest, Bay area, SoCal and Arizona.