The Independent Expansion Groundswell

[PaloAltoCougar]

True story. A buddy of mine travelled with friends and family to Laramie for a Utah/Wyoming game. Avid Ute fans, they stopped in a local sports bar, all decked out in Utah crimson. They were met with turned heads, hushed expletives and derisive looks. When the waiter finally sauntered over, he was obviously not in a friendly mood. My buddy breaks the silence by asking, "So, who do you guys hate more, us or BYU?" After that, everything was just fine.

Come on, don't leave us hanging! What was his answer?

[hostile]

Come on, don't leave us hanging! What was his answer?

Oh, I think you know

But WYO doesn't hate Utah more than it hates BYU.

[Uncle Ted]

Vai's Declaration of Independence:

Lets throw caution to the wind and declare our independence. Independence from the shackles of the World Wide Leader of incompetence, the mtn. network (who was the marketing genius who thought it would be a good idea to make "mtn." lowercase?), Mountain West Conference and the idiocy of MWC commissioner Craig Thompson.

Whether Thompson likes it or not, the MWC is BYU. No one in the MWC draws, travels or has the ratings that BYU brings. Even without Utah, the MWC can still be viable but only if BYU stays. TCU, UNLV and San Diego State are afterthoughts in their own markets; CSU, Air Force and Wyoming are in small markets that cannot sustain a MWC sans BYU.

It rankles Thompson and the rest of the MWC that BYU has so much sway and options. Now that Utah has flown the coop, the MWC and its high school-caliber/cable access Mickey Mouse network are entirely dependent on BYU.

How do I know? Well, whenever I tune into channel 784 on my TV in South Jersey for a BYU game, it seems the ads are for real estate in St. George, Larry Miller's cars and a bakery in Salt Lake. Not John Elway Ford in Denver, or the San Diego Zoo or even those "What happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas" ads. I've caught UNLV and Air Force games here and there without BYU or Utah and it's the ads are still Utah based.

[...]

BYU-TV can take Cougar Football to Polynesia where kids in Nuku'alofa and Pago Pago walk around in throwback royal blue jerseys with the names Heimuli, Sikahema, Tuipulotu, Mili, Atuaia and Salanoa stitched on the back.

Neighborhoods in Brazil might gather to watch it's native sons and daughters playing soccer and basketball in the Marriott Center

[...]

I say, let's do it.

Lets rise and shout and declare independence.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

statman my mom isn't answering her phone, are you giving her some inside scoop on the money BYU will earn? Don't keep it from the rest of us!!!!

[myboynoah]

I beheld the HD truck up close today. It was magnificent.

[Uncle Ted]

It does make me wonder a little about the Texas independence idea...

Maybe USC is having thoughts about going independent as well. Over the last two years each of the Pac-10 teams made the following:

USC: $22,904,973
Oregon: $18,438,293
UCLA: $18,012,614
Cal: $17,464,382
OSU: $17,167,040
ASU: $16,656,606
Washington: $16,598,735
Arizona: $15,402,227
WSU: $14,356,743
Stanford: $14,114,638

Over these same two years CU received $16,280,000. If the new Pac-10+2 contracts don't significantly increase the revenue adding two more teams to the PAC may give each team less money including CU (but excluding Utah, of course).

Apparently Larry Scott is pushing that the Pac-10+2 move to a 100% sharing model. To approve this change he will need a 75% vote from the conference members. This would be 9 of the 12 members (counting Utah and CU). If a 100% sharing model was used over the last two years then the money given each team in the team in the Pac-10 would have been $17,111,625. This really only significantly hurts USC and it is close enough that OSU and Cal would likely vote for it. Now add CU and Utah and Larry may have votes he needs.

If USC starts getting significantly less in the Pac-10+2 by adding two more less valued mouths to feed and being forced into the 100% share model then they may be much better off going independent especially if there are more independents to schedule with.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

It has a Little Giant Ladder. Game over, ESPN can't hang with that.

[Hot Lunch]

Maybe USC is having thoughts about going independent as well. Over the last two years each of the Pac-10 teams made the following:

USC: $22,904,973
Oregon: $18,438,293
UCLA: $18,012,614
Cal: $17,464,382
OSU: $17,167,040
ASU: $16,656,606
Washington: $16,598,735
Arizona: $15,402,227
WSU: $14,356,743
Stanford: $14,114,638

Over these same two years CU received $16,280,000. If the new Pac-10+2 contracts don't significantly increase the revenue adding two more teams to the PAC may give each team less money including CU (but excluding Utah, of course).

Apparently Larry Scott is pushing that the Pac-10+2 move to a 100% sharing model. To approve this change he will need a 75% vote from the conference members. This would be 9 of the 12 members (counting Utah and CU). If a 100% sharing model was used over the last two years then the money given each team in the team in the Pac-10 would have been $17,111,625. This really only significantly hurts USC and it is close enough that OSU and Cal would likely vote for it. Now add CU and Utah and Larry may have votes he needs.

If USC starts getting significantly less in the Pac-10+2 by adding two more less valued mouths to feed and being forced into the 100% share model then they may be much better off going independent especially if there are more independents to schedule with.

Hasn't USC in the past said that if it goes to 100% sharing they are gone? I think I was listening to Colin Cowheard when he was discussing this.

[SeattleUte]

Maybe USC is having thoughts about going independent as well. Over the last two years each of the Pac-10 teams made the following:

USC: $22,904,973
Oregon: $18,438,293
UCLA: $18,012,614
Cal: $17,464,382
OSU: $17,167,040
ASU: $16,656,606
Washington: $16,598,735
Arizona: $15,402,227
WSU: $14,356,743
Stanford: $14,114,638

Over these same two years CU received $16,280,000. If the new Pac-10+2 contracts don't significantly increase the revenue adding two more teams to the PAC may give each team less money including CU (but excluding Utah, of course).

Apparently Larry Scott is pushing that the Pac-10+2 move to a 100% sharing model. To approve this change he will need a 75% vote from the conference members. This would be 9 of the 12 members (counting Utah and CU). If a 100% sharing model was used over the last two years then the money given each team in the team in the Pac-10 would have been $17,111,625. This really only significantly hurts USC and it is close enough that OSU and Cal would likely vote for it. Now add CU and Utah and Larry may have votes he needs.

If USC starts getting significantly less in the Pac-10+2 by adding two more less valued mouths to feed and being forced into the 100% share model then they may be much better off going independent especially if there are more independents to schedule with.

No need for the disrespectful Pac 10+2. Pac 12 has been officially announced. Kindly use the proper name.

[myboynoah]

No need for the disrespectful Pac 10+2. Pac 12 has been officially announced. Kindly use the proper name.

Actually, by using Pac 10+2 he is showing the utmost respect.

Hence, I agree with you.

[SloanHater]

Appears to be Aggie Blue.

[myboynoah]

Appears to be Aggie Blue.

lmao!

That one never gets old.

[SloanHater]

lmao!

That one never gets old.

My mistake. I forgot Bronco reserves BYU Blue for special occasions.

[Coach McGuirk]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/sports/50175456-77/wac-byu-albrecht-benson.html.csp?page=1

Good read into what happened....

[Color Me Badd Fan]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/sports/...tml.csp?page=1

Good read into what happened....

WTF Fresno?

I know perhaps the rational thing is to just continue in the MWC, but I just can't bear the thought of being in the same conference with those assholes for less money.