Now it's the Pac 10's turn to contemplate expansion

Combined with the Big 10's contemplation of expansion, things are gearing up for another round of conference realignment within the next year or two.

Questions:

(1) Is it a safe assumption that, if the Pac 10 were to expand, it would be to 12, and not to 11, teams?

(2) Given that the Pac 10 doesn't have a Big 10/Notre Dame most obvious expansion target equivalent, who could be expansion targets? Utah and BYU? Boise State?

(3) Do these rumblings from the Pac 10 spur the Mountain West to invite Boise State, Fresno State and one other WAC team (Nevada) sooner rather than later to join its conference to strengthen the case of being a automatic bid conference for the BCS (and to protect its flank the best it can against teams being poached by the Pac 10)?

(4) Would the Pac 10 contemplate going for the home run by raiding the Big XII for two members (presumably Texas and Colorado)? And if invited, what would be in it for either team to move (absent any other Big XII poaching by the Big 10)?

over 2 years ago Hopkins Horn 30 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think talk of expansion is mostly that.

Talk.

Pac-10 won’t take Boise State (weak academics, limited TV/fan attraction). BYU, maybe. Utah, well, they’d almost have to take both since I’d guess the two would make that a requirement. But Utah’s TV market. Who else in the west helps a Pac-10 TV package? Colorado, maybe, and it’s not exactly in the far west (or worth a damn in the two major sports at this point).

From a football standpoint, I don’t see any BCS league doing anything in the near future. Maybe the Big East.

by edsp on Feb 9, 2010 11:51 PM CST reply actions

thank goodness someone else pointed this out

the pac 10 and the big 11 arent expanding anytime soon

just hype, started by news sites to fill their news-void offseason

now here comes 40 posts about how/when/why it will/and why it wont happen

"We'll be baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!"

by greenspointexas on Feb 10, 2010 12:38 AM CST up reply actions

So when the commissioner of the Pac 10 says . . .

. . . “the logic if the Pac-10 is going to think about expanding, now is our window,” that is merely “hype, started by news sites”? (emphasis mine)

"Texas played without its best player for nearly 56 minutes. There's an asterisk." -- Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com

by Hopkins Horn on Feb 10, 2010 8:06 AM CST up reply actions

to expand by 2011

they have to make a decision and have their teams in place within the next few months or they have to wait until 2012. The window is closing on the Pac 10 and Big 10 to expand by 2011 becacause they would need to have everything set within the necxt few months for 2011.

They reason why both conferences need to expand to 12 is because the current 12 team conferences have the advantage in the BCS with the Conference Championship games. The Pac and Big 10 conference gets 2nd rate treatment becase they don’t have a Conference Championship Game in Football. The SEC and Big 12 get more media spotlight because of the Championship Games. Which translate into more leverage in TV deals and more money.

by Ryan2907 on Feb 10, 2010 9:35 AM CST up reply actions

Good points

If the Pac 10 wants/needs to expand, it has far fewer palatable options than does the Big 10 on its quest to get to 12 teams.

Utah and BYU probably make the most sense, but, as you point out, they don’t bring a huge local market with them (though BYU might be somewhat of a national school). Perhaps the Utah markets plus the increased revenue from a championship game pushes this over the line financially.

Boise seems like a non-starter. If Stanford rejected us, for crying out loud, why would the Cardinal ever consent to BSU?

And as for raiding the Big XII? Seems like a lateral move to me for schools like Colorado or Texas to contemplate a move, unless forced to do so by other dominoes falling elsewhere (like the Big XII being weakened by a move by Mizzou to the Big 10).

The one point I disagree with is the likelihood of conference reshuffling happening soon. I feel pretty confident that it will start happening soon, and unless the Big 10 can finally lure Notre Dame, one move will lead to a few moves in its wake.

"Texas played without its best player for nearly 56 minutes. There's an asterisk." -- Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com

by Hopkins Horn on Feb 10, 2010 8:16 AM CST up reply actions

BYU and Utah

would bring the nations 35th ranked tv market. Boise State ranks like 124 around. I see the Pac 10 going with Utah and Colorado. BYU’s Sunday scheduling fiasco prevents them from the Pac 10 wanting to take them. If BYU want to move they might need to jump to the 21st century and pull out of the dark ages. If the Big 12 needs to counter and pick up a team to replace Colorado they might go with BYU because of the National Fan Base and match the media market that the Pac-10 picked up with Utah.

by Ryan2907 on Feb 10, 2010 9:27 AM CST up reply actions

This makes some sense.

I considered mentioning BYU’s Sunday issue, but in my view that affects primarily baseball (maybe women’s hoops). Don’t think it’s a big negative. Does remind me of a headline I once saw at the NCAA tennis tournament:
    BYU’s Sunday
    Doctrine may cause
    Docterin’ of schedule

by edsp on Feb 10, 2010 11:37 AM CST up reply actions

BYU and Sundays

I asked a friend of mine once who’s a huge Texas fan (and a reluctant BYU grad) what the school would do if its women’s hoops team ever made the Final Four, since those games are on a Sunday/Tuesday schedule. He felt rather confident that BYu would forfeit rather than play on Sunday if no other accommodation could be made.

"Texas played without its best player for nearly 56 minutes. There's an asterisk." -- Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com

by Hopkins Horn on Feb 10, 2010 11:55 AM CST up reply actions

I remember a Jewish phenom who signed with Maryland

He was supposed to be the next great thing, but wouldn’t play on the Sabbath. Turned out to be much ado about nothing, as he never really developed, but it raised an interesting issue. Is there a lawsuit to be had there? I don’t know.

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 10, 2010 5:11 PM CST up reply actions

Utah/BYU would be an excellent pair to add to either the Big 12 or Pac-10, IMO

Solid schools, solid finances, solid athletics, solid fanbases, solid market…what’s not to like, other than the somewhat removed geography for the Big 12, which will come with the territory of expanding markets?

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 10, 2010 5:09 PM CST up reply actions

Pac-10 and Big 10

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_14367217?source=rss

I think it would be smart for both conferences to expand to 12 and have a Conference Championship Game. The Big 12 might by raided twice. Colorado to Pac-10 and Missouri to the Big 10. I saw somewhere that the Big 12 has contacted BYU which means they probably think they might loose one team to expansion and they was to have a School in line incase they need to replace either Colorado, Missouri or both.

Any moving will probably be known within the next few months if the conference wants to expand by 2011 for the advanced notice that is needed for such a move.

by Ryan2907 on Feb 10, 2010 9:22 AM CST reply actions

Good find on the link

The question I have, though, is “What would be in it for Colorado”?

Again, if the Big 10 raids the Big XII and picks off Mizzou/Nebraska/Texas as a twelfth member, then scrambling off a sinking ship and moving to the Pac 10 makes sense.

But if Big XII maintains stability despite the Big 10, what would be in it for CU to move? It strikes me as a lateral move on many levels, done just for the sake of doing so. Unless CU sees the handwriting on the wall that the Big XII is inherently unstable (part of the reasoning behind my Texas-to-the-Big 10 arguments) and decides that it’s in its best interest to be the first domino to fall.

Can Jon or someone else from the Ralphie Report enlighten us about any other reasons why this might be contemplated? Is there some lingering unhappiness about being in the Big XII?

"Texas played without its best player for nearly 56 minutes. There's an asterisk." -- Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com

by Hopkins Horn on Feb 10, 2010 10:48 AM CST up reply actions

I was wondering that too

but after thinking about it, Colorad is one of the few teams with no major ties to the other Big 12 schools. Their biggest rival is Colorado State. Kansas has Kansas State, Nebraska has Missouri/OU, Kansas has Missouri/KSU, Iowa State belongs in the Colorado boat but not as big of a draw as Colorado nationally.

by Ryan2907 on Feb 10, 2010 3:44 PM CST up reply actions

CU-Nebraska

That’s a big football rivalry, IMO.

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 10, 2010 5:14 PM CST up reply actions

CU-Nebraska

Nebraska wouldn’t say the CU is their top rival. Before them is probably K-state, Missouri and Texas. CU’s true top rival is CSU.

by Ryan2907 on Feb 11, 2010 6:59 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

I think OU is Nebraska's biggest rival

K-State was only a big rival starting sometime in the Michael Bishop years, and ending somewhere in the Ron Prince years. It could start again, now that both programs have competent coaches again. Missouri wasn’t good at football at all until Chase Daniel, at least not in the years that NU was any good, as I recall.

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 11, 2010 9:00 PM CST up reply actions

Pac 10 first choice would be Utah

It brings a good TV market (the entire Salt Lake Valley is bigger than you may think), people from the west coast visit Utah all the time for skiing (northern wasatch mtns is where its at!) and other vacationing, SLC airport is a hub for delta (I believe) which makes transportation easier, the university is a research institution, and they don’t have to deal with the whole Sunday rule that BYU follows.

Boise doesn’t have the academics or other athletic programs to compete.

by BigTexBD on Feb 10, 2010 11:09 AM CST reply actions

So it would be Utah and who . . .

"Texas played without its best player for nearly 56 minutes. There's an asterisk." -- Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com

by Hopkins Horn on Feb 10, 2010 11:18 AM CST up reply actions

Utah, and I have no idea who else.

I suppose Colorado. They’ve always been that one “out there” school in the Big 12 to me, and I doubt any other school would really miss them (maybe Nebraska in football, but their T-Day rivalry could be continued).

But I really don’t know. Nevada? UNLV? New Mexico? Colorado State? No one is appealing in the slightest.

by BigTexBD on Feb 10, 2010 3:58 PM CST up reply actions

And that's the Pac 10's problems

There aren’t that many good options for them if they’re hellbent on getting the revenue-producing 12th team and are unable to raid the Big XII to do so.

Even the Plan B or Plan C schools the Big 10 could choose from if it goes for a 12th — schools like Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, even Cincinnati — are better than the Pac 10’s options beyond Utah and BYU.

"Texas played without its best player for nearly 56 minutes. There's an asterisk." -- Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com

by Hopkins Horn on Feb 10, 2010 4:00 PM CST up reply actions

It's a very short list indeed

BYU and Utah are there, but the list drops dramatically after that to Boise State, Nevada, UNLV, SDSU, Fresno State, etc., all of which would be tremendous disappointments to the conference. So as is apparent to pretty much everyone, they have to target BYU, Utah, and Colorado.

Does anyone know about the overall merits of UNLV and Nevada? I have to admit that I have no idea whether they are credible in finances, fanbase, facilities, and school size. It would seem like the Nevada market would be a great one to bring into the Pac-10 if possible, especially if also bringing in Utah, but I’m ignorant of the state’s prospects.

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 10, 2010 5:22 PM CST up reply actions

Texas to the Big 10.

I thought it was a dead issue, but CFT, for what it’s worth, reports UT and the big 10 have engaged in preliminary talks.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/02/11/report-big-ten-texas-have-initial-talks/

by Jrusso72 on Feb 11, 2010 11:32 AM CST reply actions

Yeah, I was about to make a fanshot about it, but here's a decent place

Link:

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2010/feb/11/big-ten-making-overtures-texas/?sports

I still dislike the option immensely, but I guess it’d at least be nice to have games out this way from time to time. As expensive as tickets might be, I’d pay to go see UT crash State College. I guess that’s the only one that’s really far enough east that I could do it in a weekend, though, because the next-closest Big Ten school to Maryland is freaking Columbus, which is more than six hours away. Then it’s Ann Arbor at eight hours, and East Lansing (ew!) at nine hours. Everything else is 10+ hours. And this is when the weather is good and traffic is nil, which is never the case on I-70.

On the bright side, I guess the Big Ten could add another school that’s closer than any of those except PSU. I doubt it, though, as Mizzou or ND would seem much more likely than any of the full Big East schools (WV, Cincy, Louisville, Syracuse) because of the farcical notion of academic benefit.

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 11, 2010 12:07 PM CST up reply actions

Penn Stater here

From your perspective: why the world would the BT want Missou? Our revenue/fanbase average is the Michigan State/Iowa range, how is Missou bringing up that average? Not to mention they are about as exciting a matchup as a game against Illinois.

I think ND and Texas would actually make a move worth it, but the same problem exists for Texas as for ND: you both have sweetheart revenue share agreements (ND: none, Texas: not much).

I know about your diabolical plan.

by KevinHD on Feb 11, 2010 3:17 PM CST up reply actions

Missouri brings St. Louis and Kansas City

And those are both solid markets. That’s why they’re there. They’re also solid in basketball and football both, at least to a greater extent than most current Big Ten schools.

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 11, 2010 3:42 PM CST up reply actions

But even with our sweetheart revenue sharing agreement . . .

. . . we’re still leaving millions on the table when compared to even the weakest Big 10 schools.

"Texas played without its best player for nearly 56 minutes. There's an asterisk." -- Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com

by Hopkins Horn on Feb 11, 2010 3:52 PM CST up reply actions

Supposedly

Again, the twelve-way split they have there does not mean that the entire pot is split. Lots of the money probably goes to the conference itself as well, including operating costs for the network.

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 11, 2010 4:29 PM CST up reply actions

Pac-10

HERE is Feldman’s take on Pac-10 expansion ($).

There are only two reasons to expand the Pac-10: to increase its television footprint and to improve its football prestige. However, short of landing the Texas Longhorns or Notre Dame Fighting Irish, there are no additions that address both issues.

by Infield Elephant on Feb 12, 2010 10:22 AM CST reply actions

I'd think Utah would as well

But I guess it’s questionable whether Utah adds enough to make the larger number of ways the pie is sliced worth it.

That paragraph makes it sound like Feldman overrates the Pac 10’s prestige at this point, I’d say.

I have beat wholesale ass for a whole lot less.

by burntorangehorn on Feb 12, 2010 1:38 PM CST up reply actions

Would Utah's TV market add that much to what the Pac-10 is currently missing out on?

And I think I agree with Bruce overrating their prestige. If you would reach as far out (geographically) as either Texas or ND, one could make a pretty hefty list of other prospects.

by Infield Elephant on Feb 12, 2010 8:14 PM CST up reply actions