Big Ten Expansion could get the dominoes rolling
by John Berkowitz on Dec 16, 2009 10:13 AM PST
Email
PrintThe Big Ten is looking at expanding in the next 18 months. We have heard it before but this time it appears they are serious about it. The reason for the expansion is the league would like to add a conference championship game to it's portfolio.
Adding a conference championship game wouldn't be guaranteed to generate a lot of extra money for each school but it would give the conference some exposure in early December which it lacks right now. Coaches and AD's are saying that the Big Ten goes to sleep until the bowl games start and that hurts recruiting, prestige, and exposure.
In a perfect world the league would add Notre Dame and all the tradition and prestige that goes with it. Since the Irish have their own national TV deal with NBC and enjoy being an independent they will just say no like they did the last time. If Notre Dame ever joins a league it will likely be the Big East since they already have an agreement to play five Big East opponents per year in football going forward. Since all the other Irish athletic teams play full big East schedules with full conference memebership it makes sense to keep moving in that direction.
Which direction does the Big Ten move? Do they plunder the Big East or do they plunder the Big Twelve?
Joe Paterno would like to see an Eastern team added to the conference and the most likely candidates that have been discussed in the past are Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Syracuse, and Rutgers. Pitt would give Penn State the natural in conference rivarly it currently lacks and it would give the league ownership of every TV set in Pennsylvania.
As far as the BCS is concerned adding Notre Dame or a Big East school would cause the least chaos. When you poach a team from the Big 12 it could get the dominoes falling again and they could fall all the way to the West coast.
The two schools the Big Ten would look at in the Big 12 would be Missouri and Nebraska with Missouri being the most likely fit because it would lock up the St. Louis TV market and also add Kansas City to the fold. Nebraska has had the most success in football but how many TV sets are there in Missouri compared to Omaha? Expansion is all about adding the most TV sets.
The best overall fit if you are looking East or West is going to be Missouri. They have the television sets and they also have the type of academic standards that will fit in nicely with the rest of the Big Ten.
So lets say Missouri joins the Big Ten. How would that affect the Pac Ten?
The Pac Ten would be the only major conference left without a championship game. Sure the Big East is still regarded as a major but they are in a position to expand anytime they want to because they have plenty of candidates close by that would be a good fit.
Out on the West coast it isn't so easy because of geographic isolation and the lack of TV sets in the mountain states. The last time the conference looked to expand it offered Colorado and Texas a spot when the old SWC broke up. Texas declined the invitation for a number of good reasons. Colorado on the other hand has always felt that the Pac Ten would be a better fit.
When you talk about Pac Ten expansion there are really only two logical candidates and they would be Utah and Colorado. Both schools would have the same challenges that Arizona and Arizona State had when they joined the conference because neither are on a par with the other Pac Ten schools at this time from and academic standpoint. They are however close enough to pull it off and joining the league would give both schools added academic prestige.
If the Big 12 loses two teams it could go a couple of different ways. Arkansas has been buried ever since it joined the SEC. The Razorbacks could be very interested in rejoining the Texas and Oklahoma schools. Texas Christian and BYU from the WAC would jump at the chance to join a restructured Big 12.
Anyway you slice it if a Big 12 team makes the move to the Big Ten the dominoes may start rolling once again.
86 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Interesting stuff,
I have always felt that adding Utah and BYU would be the best fit for the pac-10 for a number of reasons. The thing that sets them apart from other teams in they have a natural rivalry that every other pac-10 team enjoys. It would also keep the scheduling pairs that the pac-10 currently uses. I would have no objection to Colorado and Utah, though.
The best thing the pac-10 can do is expand to 12 teams, add a championship game, and cut the regular season back to 8 games. (This would make for perfect scheduling for a division format as you would play the 5 teams in your division every year, and then play 3 teams from the other division, meaning you play every team at least every other year.)
One interesting question is how to cut up the divisions if the pac did expand. You could do a north/south thing with the Washington schools, Oregon schools, and the bay schools in the north and the new Utah/Colorado schools, AZ schools, and SoCal schools in the south. I’ve heard other people say you could split up the rivals into opposite divisions. I really hope the pac-10 follows the big 10 lead here.
BYU will never be in the PAC 10...
BYU will never be in the PAC 10, it will not play on Sundays, it is a private school. The Pac 10 is interested in Public Institutions. Plus it;s research and endowment funding is very low. UTAH and Colorado are the best fit’s.
The Tunnel is Hallowed and Sacred Ground
by bigdawgdaddy999 on Dec 17, 2009 8:21 AM PST up reply actions
Don James was always against the idea of expansion, mainly because of recruiting. The thing is that expansion and then a North/South division cuts off all the Northern Schools from Southern California, and that is the Triple-AAA real estate of West Coast recruiting. If we can’t recruit from SoCal we’re dead.
The current system is great because every team gets to play at least one game in the LA area, which is huge. Imagine being able to tell an LA-area recruit that even if he comes to Seattle for school he’s still guaranteed to play at least one game a year in LA, so his family and folks and friends can show up. It’s also important to play in LA because it provides mind share and presence.
Well then...
…how about having the conference split east and west?
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
They can always expand the league schedule.
And shorten the non-league schedules to accomodate.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Dec 16, 2009 8:48 PM PST up reply actions
Good and Accurate Overview of Expansion Options
The PAC will not sacrifice academic prestige or cultural standards to expand. BYU, Fresno State, etc. is not happening.
by 206 on Dec 16, 2009 11:42 AM PST via mobile reply actions
If the Big 10 expands
would it be called the Big 11? After all, 12 is taken unless they steal a team from that conference.
They kept the “Big-10” name when they expanded to 11 to include Penn State – they have too much invested in the name “Big-10” to change it.
Did you know that there is an '11' in the Big Ten name?
If you look on either side of the T on the Big Ten logo, you will see a “1”, thus 11. It was designed on a cocktail napkin by an Iowa student. No doubt a well used napkin.
PAC 10 academic standards
Actually, Utah would fall in the middle of PAC 10 academic standards. Cal and Stanford are in a class by themselves, followed by Washington and USC. Utah is about on par with UCLA, and at least as good or better than the rest. There are already extensive academic ties between Utah and especially Stanford, Cal, USC and Washington. Colorado is about the same as Utah.
Utah is out of place academically in the MWC. New Mexico might be the closest, but otherwise MWC schools don’t match Utah as a research-intensive university. Utah would fit right into the PAC 10 both academically and athletically, maybe more so than a number of current PAC 10 schools.
I’d quibble slightly with your academic assessments – my impression is that UCLA is more highly regarded than you imply, on par with USC and UW. But ranking Universities on their academics is highly subjective, and it really depends on what particular qualities you are evaluating.
I think Utah and Colorado make the most sense for expansion, from an academic, athletic and TV revenue standpoint. I don’t think BYU will ever be seriously considered.
BYU as PAC 10 candidate
BYU is an interesting case. Of course they are a conservative religious institution owned by the Mormon church. By choice, they hold down their graduate program and emphasize their undergraduate education. The undergraduate education is quite strong actually; their students go onto graduate study at all kinds of prestigious institutions. A little known fact is that they rank 7th in the country in the proportion of students eventually going on to PhDs.
They probably killed their chances though because of the gay marriage thing in CA.
Yeah, I think there are multiple reasons why BYU will never be seriously considered for inclusion in the Pac-10, some academic, most cultural.
Could you expound on that...
…kirk? Thanks
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Utah on a par with UCLA
Nope…I would say the Bruins are right there or even a little higher in rank than Washington.
If Utah and Colorado join the league they would be on par with Arizona and Arizona State.
On BYU…they will never be considered.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 16, 2009 2:22 PM PST up reply actions
Based on what?
US News has Colorado ahead of both schools in their public school rankings. Also ahead of OSU and Oregon. Stanford, Cal, and UCLA are in their own class but I think CU fits nicey
The Slipper Still Fits - SB Nation's home for the Gonzaga Bulldogs!
So what's the academic hierarchy...
…in the Pac-10? I saw the first few you mentioned just curious where wsu fits in?
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Every School...
…. has some top-flight colleges and/or programs. Hence much of the subjectivity in the academic “rankings”. What new strenghts would UT, CO, or even BYU have to offer? At least BYU could offer theological diversity. ;-)
Academic Standards? How high?
John,
Could you please elaborate a wee bit on you mean by “academic standards” needed to be “on a on a par with the other Pac Ten schools…”
Do you mean it in terms say like the California system where the ten “U of C’s” are essentially the Phd granting with a strong research orientation (a key source of that so-called ‘prestige’)? As opposed to the the 23 Cal State schools which award bachelor’s, master’s and (limited) doctoral degrees.
Many posts here tend to rank the perceived “prestige” of a university. As opposed to being an “accredited” university which every university mentioned in this thread decidedly is. Accreditation is thorough, rigorous and, importantly, an independent process and it ensures that students will get a world class education.
Is academic prestige all that crucial for admission into a sports conference? Prestige, that is, beyond the accreditation stage?
I’m wondering because it terms of pure academic prestige, which is where universities derive this positioning, not many universities within the PAC 10 really compete with Sanford.
The world thinks of Stanford within the same breath as a Harvard, or MIT. Their best and brightest — kids that can go anywhere — typically go to these schools and the latter two are not particularly renown for the football prowess.
None of this is to say that any of the other schools of our conference aren’t damn good universities. They are all.
But I’m not sure anyone who’s currently attending Stanford — anyone who’s not a one of their sport teams — is there because of its perceived PAC Ten ‘academic’ standards.
Doesn’t any formally accredited university have enough academic ‘standards’ to be considered for the PAC 10?
My academic perceptions of Stanford are very different from my athletic perceptions of the Palo Alto based university.
Which brings us to other important criteria for PAC Ten admittance: like the demographics and economic impact you so rightly mention.
The Pac-10 schools affiliate on academic levels in addition to athletics. All of the Pac-10 schools are research institutions of a very high order, and that puts them a cut above quite a few schools in the NCAA. It’s a source of pride for the Pac-10, similar to the way the Big-10 views themselves.
Obviously not all of the schools in the conference are on a level of academic prestige similar to Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC or the UW. But relatively speaking, they’re all pretty good schools overall (even WSU and Oregon, as much as we like to poke fun at them), and they all have the research credentials that the conference prides itself on.
Splitting the Conference Up
One way to do it is simply not folowing any geography at all. Split the natiral rivals into seperate divisions.
Division A
WSU
OSU
Stanford
Arizona State
UCLA
Utah
Division B
Washington
Oregon
USC
California
Arizona
Colorado
There’s some validity to doing a split that way, but it’s also very arbitrary – which rivals go in which division? If expansion ever happens, there will be a lot of politicking and squawking about who goes where.
Well
You can divide up anyway you want doing it this way but each division is assured of having a team in each state/region.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 16, 2009 3:39 PM PST up reply actions
I've had this idea since the Big 12 expanded
We would split them up based upon the north/south relationship within their own in-state rival. Example follows:
Pac 12 North Division
Ucla (north of usc)
Washington (north of wsu)
Oregon State (north of oregon)
Cal (north of stanford)
Arizona State (north of arizona)
Utah (north of byu)
Pac 12 South Division
USC (south of ucla)
Washington State (south of washington)
Oregon (south of osu)
Stanford (south of cal)
Arizona (south of asu)
BYU (south of utah)
Not sure how it would play out if Colorado was accepted over BYU. Yet each in-state “natural” rival is split between divisions, where each in-state rivalry game would be the last game of the season prior to the Pac 12 championship game. Look how balanced the league looks? USC and Ucla would be split so there would be no squabbling, plus the NW powers of Washington and Oregon would be split.
This alignment is the most perfect way to divide the league, the only thing left would be determining where the Pac 12 Championship game is to be played. I say we hold the contest in San Diego, home of the San Diego Chargers- neutral site and huge recruiting area for the contestents.
All I saw was purple
Not to mention...
But each state is well represented in both league divisions. Do we really need a larger television market? Maybe not.
If we were to take in-state rivals Utah and BYU, how many major metro cities would be in the Pac 12 television market? A lot!
LA, San Francisco, Oakland, Portland, Seattle, Pheonix, and Salt Lake City. But with the Pac 10 expanding we’d own all the regional tv coverage west of the Rockies. San Diego, Las Vegas, Sacramento, Spokane, Boise, and all points in between. Pac 10 football would completely dominate west of the Rockies.
Not to mention but I’d wager we’d be able to keep a lot of home grown kids staying in our league. I think a lot of California prep recruits would stay closer to home. I’m just trying to get into the evolutionary process that “could” occur if we were to expand. We’d definitely keep a lot of Hawaii kids on the west coast. A lot of Hawaii kids have been influenced by Utah and BYU. On the other hand, with the total domination of Pac 10 football with expansion, I wouldn’t be surprised if upstart programs like Boise State, Fresno State, and Nevada-Reno went belly up in the process. If the Pac 10 expands to the Pac 12, most prep recruits out west would consider the Pac 12 as the to tier to get to.
Yet nothing is going to happen unless our league can see a Pac 12 football championship game making a profit. That’s the key to expansion. That’s the single biggest reason why BCS leagues are doing it. But if we don’t expand, you’ll see a lot more Pac 10 league games scheduled later into the month of december. We have to expand if we want to compete!
All I saw was purple
And the exposure...
…that’s the other reason. If you’re not on TV, the public doesn’t notice you!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
BYU
BYU is a priavete school and is not a research institution…so no way they get in. they are incompatible on a lot of different levels.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 9:14 AM PST up reply actions
Or
you could split them by east west among the instate rivals. West: UW, OSU, Stanford, UCLA, ASU, Utah and east: WSU, Ore, Cal, USC, AZ, Colo. In football, each school will play their rival plus 2 others out of division on a rotational basis, home and home. 5 division games, 1 rival game, plus 2 out of division, leaving 4 games to be scheduled for max $$$.
Are there recruiting implications?
If schools within a division all play each other every year, but only some schools from the other division, then if one division becomes dominant, won’t the best 5 and 4 star recruits tend to gravitate to where they think will be the best competition? That is to percieved ‘better’ Pac Ten A division rather than the weaker Pac 10 B.
This isn’t baseball — or even pro football — where you have a lot more games — more of a ‘season’ — to work with.
If we’re not in the dominant division, could it make it that much harder to get the very best HS players?
by ThaiDiamond on Dec 16, 2009 11:49 PM PST up reply actions
In the Big-12
it seems like the 4-5 star guys gravitate towards the better programs rather than division. It so happens that the better programs are in the south division, but UT and OU pick up more 4-5 stars than any other schools. I don’t think conference divisions play too much into it, unless it’s a jump from non-BCS to BCS AQ.
National Rankings
John, I absolutely love the blog and have been an avid reader since well before you moved over to SB Nation. I’ve however been remiss in not signing up earlier, but there are now so many great things to talk about in Husky Nation that I couldn’t resist.
I read your post about possible conference expansion and wanted to chime in. The US News and World Report rankings, which all the kids go by, for better or worse, and which are primarily based on how difficult the schools are to get into (i.e., the most academically prestigious), show that Colorado has higher academic requirements than the majority of the Pac 10, while Utah would definitely be bringing up the rear.
Here are the rankings:
School: Public University Rank Overall
Stanford: N/A 4
Berkeley: 1 21
UCLA: 2 24
USC: N/A 26
Washington: 11 42
BYU: N/A 71
Colorado: 34 77
University of Arizona: 48 102
Washington State: 52 106
University of Oregon: 57 115
Arizona State: 60 121
University of Utah: 63 126
Oregon State: Not ranked No ranking provided. Tier 3.
Boise State: Couldn’t find it. Anywhere.
Here is a link to the US News site: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges.
As you can see, based on the rankings, Colorado would probably add to the academic prestige of the conference. I am surprised that Colorado’s world renowned engineering, aerospace and physical sciences programs aren’t more well known. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the Pac should expand. I love the complete round robin scheduling and I think it gives us a valid justification for not having a championship game. However, I do understand that money talks and if we do expand, I think Colorado is a perfect choice, both academically and geographically. (Disclosure: I’m both a CU and UW grad so I may be a little biased, but the numbers bear out. Also, thank god you’re not a CU football fan. The university has basically said that football is not a priority and it is very painful to hardcore buff fans out here).
Anyways, Boise State has great football, but their academic programs are not highly regarded (to say the least), BYU just doesn’t feel like it’s the right fit although they’re an excellent school, and Utah would be near the bottom of the barrel academically, although they’re still a fine institution in relation to the rest of the nation. There seemed to be a little disagreement about the “prestige” of each school and right now, the US News rankings are what it’s all about.
In that case...
…if in fact the buffs were picked, who is the best candidate to be the other one?
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Utah?
I agree with John that Colorado and Utah seem to be the best fits. Utah may be near the bottom of the Pac academically, but they aren’t at the bottom (thanks, OSU) and their football program and facilities are definitely on par with the Pac.
Going outside the box, what about University of Idaho (Tier 3 Academically)? I don’t know how many Pac 10 teams the Palouse can support, but geographically it would fit, although academically probably not.
Even further outside the box, how about University of Montana or Montana State (both Tier 3 academically)? I know Idaho, Montana and MSU would have a really, really long way to go to get in, but it’s kind of fun to think about. Didn’t we at one point kick Montana out of the Pac?
Montana and Idaho
Montana was in the PCC until 1950 while Idaho was in the league until 1958. Been there done that and it won’t happen again.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 16, 2009 7:52 PM PST up reply actions
There’s no incentive at all to bring in those schools – small TV markets, not academically prestigious enough, and not even close to competitive enough athletically.
Watering Down California?
How about a San Diego State?
San Diego county’s economy is roughly the size of Oregon’s…with a population some 80% of the entire Beaver State.
We’re talking TVs here.
You could make similar numbers for a San Jose State as well in the demographically dense northern CA market.
Arguing against all this, is that these two schools would definitely be in the lower tier of the Pac 10 in terms of football prowess.
Would they water down the entire conference as they would be perceived weaker members?
From a Dawg’s viewpoint, could they (eventually) improve enough to compete against the other CA Pac 10 schools for key recruits? In other words, six CA universities fighting within that states 35 million souls for recruits.
These are Qs only…
I think both schools could improve athletically if they were a part of the conference, but both would need a serious influx of funding in their programs to bring their facilities up to par and to have a broader, more successful range of scholarship athletic programs.
And while San Diego is indeed a fairly significant TV market, I think the Pac-10 already dominates it – it’s not like local broadcasts of San Diego State football are capturing a lot of eyeballs there.
Also, while San Diego State is a research institution, San Jose State is not. And San Diego State is not a research institution of the highest level as the Pac-10 schools all are.
With the dominance of Pac 12 football, we’d have those (San Diego) tv markets. We’d also have Las Vegas.
I don’t think we need another Pac 10 team in the state of California. We currently have four. If we add a SDSU or Fresno or San Jose then surely the out of state Pac 12 teams would have a rougher time getting California kids. I can see the trend, California schools win 9 out of 10 seasons.
I think the most logical for many reasons, especially to keep our in-state rivalry tradition going would be to take either Utah and BYU or Colorado and Colorado State. It won’t be easy either way because we don’t know if Colorado would leave the Big 12 and BYU would have to seperate church from state, which I don’t think they can or will.
Taking Utah and Colorado would be ideal for a larger tv market, but how would it work with a league that embraces it’s in-state rivalries? That is the question that we all need to ask ourselves. Are they too important?
All I saw was purple
Utah. Their ranking is still pretty good in the grand scheme of things, and certainly not enough to detract from the other positives of adding them. If you assume that BYU isn’t ever going to get serious consideration, then Utah is the best candidate.
San Diego State fits in many ways – it’s a research University with a respectable academic reputation, and it would solidify the San Diego TV market. The big problem is they’re just not a big-time school with regard to athletics – they’d need to start spending a lot more money on facilities and coaches in football and basketball to not drag down the athletic reputation of the conference in the money-making sports. And while they are the primary team in San Diego, that market is already basically owned by the Pac-10 due to the proximity of the LA area and the 2nd rate status of San Diego State football.
Now, you could argue that entry into the Pac-10 would boost San Diego State’s profile in a big way and make it easier for them to recruit higher level players and become a pretty good program, but they’d still need some funding to get their facilities up to snuff.
Utah has the big advantage of being ready to go athletically – adding them wouldn’t hurt the prestige of the conference.
I think that makes sense...
…you get into the Denver/Colorado market and the Salt Lake City/Utah market. There are still a lot of Mormons that follow the Utes.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
An Expansion "Period"
Kirk,
You make some good points on San Diego State.
I too agree they would have to get up to get up to speed. But in terms of at least some of their facilities — they currently play in Qualcomm Stadium which they share with the Charges — some key elements are in place.
Demographically speaking, it’s one of the biggest remaining markets in the US without a major college program. It dwarfs Utah. And while many people tend to link it with LA, it is 115 miles to the south. And a lot less close when you drive between the two during peak hours.
It can’t been seen it from Sarah Palin’s front porch.
And for those who prefer to keep the Pac Ten “pacific” (relatively speaking)…
Perhaps position this like when the pros add an expansion team; no one expects much for the first five years or so.
Though they could give Wazzu hell right off the bat (LOL)!
by ThaiDiamond on Dec 16, 2009 11:20 PM PST up reply actions
Great Stuff!!!!
That’s one heck of a first post! I love the stats, especially because they point out how out classed Boise State would be in the Pac10.
Colorado and Washington have a lot in common. Both winning a national championship under GREAT coaches, followed by the school administrations getting jealous of the attention, so they do everything possible to destroy the football program. I tend to think Colorado would be a great addition to the Pac-10, it would be fun to re-ignite the CU vs. UW rivalry, I’m just curious how interested Colorado would be?
"Legends are made on the shores of Lake Washington"
"BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON"
Thanks for looking that up
I was going to print that but didn’t have the time to look it up.
I think Colorado is a perfect fit. Utah is more like the Arizona schools were when they were admitted. They would have a little work to do but it is very doable.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 9:19 AM PST up reply actions
Outside the Box Choices
I think that if the Pac were to expand I think they should keep the geographic rivalry theme going. How about the Nevada Schools (Nevada-Reno, UNLV), or if they were to go into Colorado they could do UC and Air Force.
The Nevada Schools are fairly underrated sports wise, but if Academics is the major hurdle these schools need to get past then I don’t see any reason why Colorado and a Service Academy would fail to cut it.
UNLV
They would be an intriguing choice but I wouldn’t think UNevada at Reno wouldn’t be so good. I don’t think one has to include the “other” in state school to make the conference switch. It would be a natural out of conference match up that you could play every year.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
You guys should check out
this link. I stumbled across it recently and this guy takes a thorough look at expansion candidates in terms of a number of categories, like historical football power, football popularity, football attendance, basketball, academic prestige, and athletic budget. It shows how the numbers stack up against the current members too.
Utah and Colorado
Would probably be the best choices.
The Texas schools wouldn’t leave the Big 12. Even TCU would probably prefer to wait for a Big 12 spot to open before coming to the Pac-10.
SJST, Fresno and Boise aren’t strong enough academically to be considered. I suspect Nevada, UNLV and even BYU (despite a strong undergrad program, lacks graduate programs) aren’t either.
BYU’s Mormon influence would be an issue to, I believe.
Surprisingly, Hawaii actually looks like a fairly decent option, from spencer’s link, but football wise aren’t typically very good (their recent run with June Jones notwithstanding)
Utah and Colorado would be the strongest options for Pac-10 addition. However, unless forced to I don’t feel the Pac-10 has much interest in expansion.
Travel costs, time zone difference and lack of consistent success rule out Hawaii. Utah and Colorado definitely make the most sense. I think it will take Larry Scott getting a much better TV deal going than we currently have to convince Colorado to leave the Big-12. I doubt it will take much convincing to bring Utah on board.
Big 12
Has the same lousy Fox deal the Pac 10 has. I dislike ESPN’s coverage of ABC college football. ABC needs to get back in the broadcasting game as an independent.
All I saw was purple
I think it will take some incentive to get Colorado out of the Big-12. Given their long history in the conference and the rivalries they’ve built up, I’m not sure they jump to the Pac-10 without some added incentive in the form of a better TV deal.
Utah on the other hand would likely bolt the MWC for the Pac-10 without much convincing needed.
Agreed
Yet if we take a Utah and Colorado, how does that effect our in-state rivalry competition that we thrive on? Hell each game has it’s own unique name, i.e. Apple Cup, Civi War, the Big Game, Crosstown Rival, Battle in the Desert. How does Utah and Colorado fit? And do we embrace the new arrivals as “real” members of the league without having an in-state rival? These are questions that will come up when the league considers expansion. So how important are the in-state games?
Penn State in the Big 10 is a perfect example of what I am referring too. Each member of the Big 10 fits the league like a glove. Penn State doesn’t quite fit does it? It seems more logical for PSU to play in the Big East and therefore you see an unorthodox situation. Fans today are still trying to get use of the fact that Penn State is a member of the Big 10. How would two schools out west without having an in-state rivalry look in the Pac 10?
Again I think the money is with taking Utah and Colorado- but do they fit is the question. Yet for logical purposes the in-state rivalry thing is what makes this league unique, you cannot deny that. Therefore I propose we take Utah and BYU or Colorado and Colorado State.
P.S. I’ve heard that Rutgers is the leading candidate for Big 10 expansion. It would provide PSU with another East Coast league member, Rutgers is relevent in almost every colliegate sport, and the tv deal the Big 10 would rake in from Jersey and NY would be too great to pass up. If Rutgers gets the invite, they go without pause! It’s Rutgers…
All I saw was purple
Colorado and Colorado State
They play their opener every year in Denver. They haven’t been in the same league since the late 1940’s.
Colorado State is in no way shape or form a potential Pac 10 school.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 9:23 AM PST up reply actions
Rutgers?
The number one candidate right now is Missouri. They have every single thing the Big 10 is looking for in a school. After that I would say it would be Pitt. Rutgers does have some potential pull because of the TV sets.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 9:24 AM PST up reply actions
Since ABC and ESPN are owned by the same entity
It isn’t going to happen. ABC sports is now completely controlled by ESPN. IT does make a little sense because there was no need for duplication within the same corporation.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 9:21 AM PST up reply actions
It's a BAD production
Dan Fouts was a horrible duck homer, but he became the voice of Pac 10 football after Keith Jackson retired. The guys ESPN has doing ABC Pac 10 football are boring! It makes for a real Yawn fest.
All I saw was purple
At this point I don't think we look at expansion
Our Pac 10 basketball tournament doesn’t draw squat in attendance. Nice venue but the tournament looks empty in that arena.
Could a Pac 12 football championship game make money? That is the real question. I agree w/ John that Utah and Colorado are the best choices, yet we’d be losing a part of what makes this league great. We have an elite in-state rival for every school right now. I seriously doubt if any other major conference can boast about that as much as the Pac 10. However, the question we all have to ask ourselves “How important are the in-state rivalry games?” Our league has been trending further and further away from rivalry weekend as it is. Arizona-Arizona State moved their game a week back. USC-Ucla moved their game a week back. Oregon-Oregon State moved their game two weeks back. I believe the only two schools that have kept the rivalry games the weekend before thanksgiving is Washington-Washington State and Cal-Stanford. But even we moved our game back a week this last season. So really, how important are the in-state rivalries?
If we expand we will unfortunately have to allow this tradtion to flounder, that is unless we take a Utah-BYU, UNLV-UNReno, Colorado-Colorado State. Or we could take SDSU-Fresno, but I think the Califronia market is already tapped.
It has to be either Utah-Colorado or Utah-BYU. The only way BYU would be considered is if BYU would not interfere with league principals and agree to seperate church from state, would BYU comply is the real answer. Also BYU would have to begin playing on sundays (basketball). It would be a stretch for BYU to comply and I don’t see that happening. But if expansion was to be considered, and we wanted to continue the in-state rivalry tradition, then surely Utah-BYU or Colorado-Colorado State are the only logical choices. I love our in-state rivalry tradition and I don’t want to see it interrupted due to institutionalized-corrporate greed.
All I saw was purple
Pac 10 Basketball Tournament
I think the Pac 10 basketball tournament should rotate between five different locations.
1. Seattle
2. Portland
3. San Jose or Oakland
4. Anahiem or Los Angeles
5. Phoenix
If Utah and Colorado are added you can easily make a case for Salt Lake city and Denver being added to the rotation. Fox controls the tournament at this point and from a logistical standpoint the Staples Center makes sense for them. On the other hand LA isn’t excited about the event since it is n annual thing. Rotate it around and there will be some packed houses.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 9:28 AM PST up reply actions
Could not agree more
I think if we get this basketball tournament in Portland and Seattle, the house could sell out. The Staples Center is a nice publicity venue, but it doesn’t appeal to folks much outside the league if the house is empty.
Rotating the tournament would keep in fresh, exciting, and many cities would bring in revenue, along with the league w/ ticket sales.
All I saw was purple
Unfortunately it is about TV
Since Fox Sports controls it rotating it will be a problem. Just another reason not to like Fox
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
Would a Pac 10 Football Championship make money?
A Pac Ten Championship football game would generate a minimum of $5 million dollars per year.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 9:42 AM PST up reply actions
But you also have to add in the costs the league will have to pay out. Stadium rental, concessions, travel, hotel accomidations, marketing, tv deal. Not to mention but where on Earth would the Pac 10 hold such an event? Right now San Diego would be the most lucrative site. NFL stadium, good weather, neutral site (sort a speak), and travel to and from would be accomidating.
If the Big 10 expands, the Pac 10 will be close behind. But I see the Pac 10 taking its time to ensure we get the best possible programs in.
All I saw was purple
Nope Crazi
That is an automatic $5 million just from television. That does not take into account ticket sales, or corporate sponsorships outside of television.
It is just another road game for the two schools involved in the game.
Where on Earth would they hold the game?
San Diego, Pasadena, or San Francisco would be the most likely locations.
I think San Diego would be the best. Warm weather, neutral stadium, and a desireable place to travel to in December.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions
Utah for sure!
But who will come in with the Utes is the question. Colorado might say no and BYU has religious issues. All the other programs are small market, except for SDSU- but do we need another Califronia Pac 10 school?
It’ll be Utah and somebody…
All I saw was purple
If it isn't Colorado or Texas...
The league simply won’t expand because those are the only two schools that make sense in addition to Utah….oh ya if UT wanted in Utah would be out….I wouldn’t count on that happening though.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
Texas?
I doubt Texas, Oklahoma, or Nebraska would even listen to a proposal. Their roots are sunk into that part of the country. I don’t think A&M would give it a looksey. Texas Tech is bottom feeder stuff, Oklahoma State needs the bedlam. Baylor? Kansas State? Iowa State? Conference USC tried this cross country league concept and it ultimately failed.
I think if expansion is on the horizon, which I doubt, then surely we have to stay west of the Rockies.
All I saw was purple
They could listen...
The Big Ten is actually talking about the possibility of expanding to as many as 14-16 teams according to the Chicago Tribune. If that happens all hell will break lose and the Big Twelve will end up folding like a deck of cards.
It is all about market share and if the Big Ten made a move like that the other conferences would likely follow suit. It would absolutely put the Texas schools in play.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 3:54 PM PST up reply actions
University of Hawaii would literally jump at the chance to join the Pac-10.
However, they do not have either the TV market or the academic standards to pull it off.
Boise State might.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
Nope – Boise State isn’t a research institution.
Read the link posted above by spencer peaty – it does a great job of breaking down the various factors. And when you consider that BYU is highly unlikely to be admitted to the Pac-10, it becomes clear that the two best candidates (by far) are Colorado & Utah.
Boise State
They’ve taken a page for Gonzaga in terms of marketing strategies and exposure. I don’t think the Pac 10 takes BSU, their football team only dates back to the early 70s. On top of that the school originated from “community college” academics.
I also think that blue field has got to go. I hate watching a BSU game. You can’t even see the players because the blue uniforms blend in with the blue field. So what you have left to see is a few numbers moving around on you tv. The blue field is a nice little gimmick, but it has outlived it’s usefulness. In a perfect world: Utah moves up to the the Pac 10 and the Mountain West and WAC join forces and takes the best programs from each league to form a super mid major league.
All I saw was purple
Hawaii
I have nothing against Hawaii but they don’t have the money to be in the Pac 10 from an academic or athletic standpoint.
One look at the athletic facilities over in the islands will have you shaking your head.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 9:44 AM PST up reply actions
Associate members
According to its Wikipedia entry, in addition to its 10 full members, the Pac-10 has:
Associate members (men’s soccer)
* San Diego State University Aztecs
Associate members (wrestling)
* Boise State Broncos
* Cal Poly at San Luis Obispo Mustangs
* Cal State Fullerton Titans
* Cal State Bakersfield Roadrunners
* Portland State Vikings
* UC Davis Aggies
Scratch them off the list
They won’t even be considered. It’s all about money making sports. Wrestling is dying and soccer isn’t an elite American sport. It’s all about the cash flow brotha…
All I saw was purple
Big Ten discussion?
This has really been interesting. I’ve thought that BSU and BYU would be a nice addition, but now I’m convinced by this discussion that Utah and CU are the two teams. BSU lacks the academic clout (and overall sports program) and John has convinced me that BYU will never be allowed in (for mostly unknown reasons).
For Crazi, despite Utah and Colorado not being cross state rivalries, they will quickly develop one. And the prestige of the Pac-12 will lift the other programs at Utah. Colo may hesitate to leave the Big 12, but Utah will drop the MWC in a heartbeat. An interesting fallout could be that Arkansas leaves the SEC to replace Colo in the Big12 and suddenly the all mighty SEC is looking for a new team.
Possible, but rather unlikely
Arkansas has a gold mine as a member of the SEC. It would take quite a bit for the Razorbacks to leave that money on the table. But I do see your dominos effect. One reason why Colorado might be interested in joining the Pac 10 is because they recruit California just as much as any of us do. But their history is in the Big Eight and Big 12, I’m not sure they’d be willing to trade that tradtion away.
If Colorado says no, who’s next in line?
All I saw was purple
Arkansas
The SEC is so far ahead of everyone in revenue it would be hard to see the Hogs move to the Big 12 for a lesser slice of the pie. The fans might like it but it is really all about money.
by John Berkowitz on Dec 17, 2009 11:11 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
