# PAC 10 Expanding?



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

Many rumors flying today from KC where the Big 12 is meeting. Rumors have it that Larry Scott Pac 10 commish plans to invite............Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, CO, OK, and OK St to join the Pac 10. If this happens each school would being seeing a payout around $20mill a yr in contract money and you would also see a Pac1X network quickly formed. (Rumors in the past have said both Discovery and ESPN have talked to the Pac 10 about giving them one of their current networks and sharing ownership). The Pac 10 would then split into 2 divisions with current teams minus the AZ schools being in the "west" and new schools forming the other division wtih AZ schools. Guess we'll have to wait and see, the PAC 10 is meeting this wknd in SF. Also to note in this is the large DMA's that would be covered by member schools I think 9 of the 20 largest markets would be within the footprint of the new PAC 1X. Rumor has it Texas A&M isn't sure if they'd join the Pac 10 or possibly decide to head to the SEC.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Wow, this would certainly force the issue a little. I'm sure that the PAC 10 is afraid that if they wait, they will get killed when the Big 11 and then potentially SEC and ACC make moves, so nothing like a premeptive strike.


----------



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

It will be interesting to see if this does come to be, I guess there was supposed to be a press conf last night at the Big 12 meetings that ended up being canceled. There were also some reports that The Pac 10 and FOX had already come to an agreement on a new dedicated channel. Guess we'll know more after the weekend Pac 10 meetings.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

The Pac 10 adding real schools like UT & OU? Will USC allow that? :lol: That means real competition within conference in football for USC.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

sum_random_dork said:


> It will be interesting to see if this does come to be, I guess there was supposed to be a press conf last night at the Big 12 meetings that ended up being canceled. There were also some reports that The Pac 10 and FOX had already come to an agreement on a new dedicated channel. Guess we'll know more after the weekend Pac 10 meetings.


I think we will have to wait for after the Pac-10 meetings before we know anything for sure. I am really hating these super conferences. BCS crap is bad enough, the more Super conference's the worse it will be. Still remember the good ol Pac-8 days' and long live the DAWG Father.


----------



## dettxw (Nov 21, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> The Pac 10 adding real schools like UT & OU? Will USC allow that? :lol: That means real competition within conference in football for USC.


But will that really matter after USC gets the death penalty? :lol:

I know, I know - not very damn likely that anything will happen to USC even close to what they deserve, but still fun to speculate.

It looks like something will happen to the Big XXII one way or another. Missouri/Nebraska will jump to the Big 11, or A&M will jump to the SEC, or the PAC 10 rumors will come true. Making realignment more likely is the added pressure to not be left behind, to do something before the other schools do.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

I think this is unlikely.

The lesson here is from the original WAC. In the last conference shuffle, it went to 16 teams. 

It simply did not work. 16 teams is just too many. It could not hold fans attention as a "conference game". It failed and colapsed.

And what happened? Did the "old" teams just kick out the "new" teams? Not exactly. UTEP and Hawaii got done in. The other old WAC teams reformed the old WAC under the name Mountain West, leaving UTEP and Hawaii out in the cold, stuck in the new WAC, a much lesser league. 

Now Pacific 10 expansion requires a unanimous vote. If I were the Oregon, Washington, or NoCal, or even Arizona schools, I would think long and hard about letting the Big 12 South in, lest I be tossed out in a few years.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Some expansion is probably inevitable, especially with all the positive press the Big Ten network has gotten for being a profitable venture...

but, eventually 16 teams is going to look like a bad idea... hopefully sooner than later.

It helps to kill some in-conference rivalries since you can't play everybody in your conference... and it limits the out of conference games too... so in the long run it will not be as good as having your 12-team conference.

So I can see conferences expanding to 12 teams (like the ACC did some years back)... but beyond that really does push the limits.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, CO, OK, and OK St? I get it. The modern generation failed geography. I'm sorry but I thought Idaho and Montana were a reach back when and I'm not too happy with Arizona. But let's keep it to schools in states that touch the Pacific, or at least states that touch states that that touch the Pacific.


----------



## Mikemok1981 (Jul 9, 2009)

Apparently there is more juice to this rumour than originally thought.

Link: Texas Legislators want Baylor in Mix

If this is report is true then I cant imagine that this suspected invitation is just vapor.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Oh, it sure looks like it is happening to me. Too much smoke from reliable peopel on Twitter and elsewhere. Plus the PAC 10 governing board voted to give the PAC 10 commisioner full authority to get it moving including inviting teams.

Also, with the reports now of the Big 10 moving on Nebraska and Missouri and them being given an ultimatum to commit to the Big 12 by the end of the week, it will force their hands. How can they commit to a league that may well lose half its members in a few weeks or months time? IMO, this almost makes Nebraksa and Missouri have to go to the Big 10 to protect their own interests. Once that happens, it will be open season on Big 12 teams so the PAC 10 move will be all the much easier. Hopefully, Notre Dame is the last Big 10 to make it 14 (not sure how they will draw that in their logo  )

The only glitch will be if the SEC tries to take Texas A&M (they have been in talks). This would make it easier for Pac10 to take Baylor as the Texas Legislature wants and would get A&M out from under Texas' shadow. I can esily see them being tired of having their game against Texas determine if they even get to play for the Big12 (or eventually PAC16 champishisp) each year as they are in the same half of the division and surely the PAC 10 will align by divisions and not do top two.

Not that the SEC is much better for that. One thing all these conferences might well be overlooking is you need to have a few scrubs in each sport so your top teams are not taking too many losses every year. Ideally, some of your basketball powers might suck in football, at least most years, so everyone contributes somewhere.

There are several scenarious I can thing that would give the PAC16 (if thats what happens) and SEC half the top 20 in any given year, if not more. That is going to cause some massive pressure to change the BCS formula.

I have to say, I am also afraid of what might happen to my ACC. Hopefully they are more on top of this than it seems as the it also appears the SEC has huge plans to try and take the southern teams away from the ACC. The ACC will lose any chance to eventually be a football power and might just become like the Big East and be a basketball conference.

I can also see the WAC, Mountain west and whats left of the Big 12 mixing up to become a couple of 12 team leagues. THat could actually be good for them as they could well get a seat at the BCS out of all this to help ease the pain politically.

This whole thing looks to be a big game of musical chairs except they are not really telling you when teh music is stopped and they are taking away about 4 chairs at a time.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Lee L said:


> I can also see the WAC, Mountain west and whats left of the Big 12 mixing up to become a couple of 12 team leagues. THat could actually be good for them as they could well get a seat at the BCS out of all this to help ease the pain politically.
> 
> This whole thing looks to be a big game of musical chairs except they are not really telling you when the music is stopped and they are taking away about 4 chairs at a time.


Helping out the Mountian and the WAC, would be a good thing. Keeping the Pac-10 to 12 or so and let the others move into the WAC, and Mountain would be a good thing.
I don't want to see a Pac-16 Super Conference. I hate the super conferences now as it is. 
I Understand that because of what is happening and things that have happened, the Pac-10 needs to do something, nobody wants to see the Pac become a WAC, MWC, MAC, conference, and that is what will happen, with no changes. I just want to much growth that ruins what the Pac-10 is, way to many great rivilaries will suffer for this.

Long live the DAWGFATHER.


----------



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

It will be an interesting week it sounds like NE and Mizzu have until the end of the week to tell the Big 12 what their plans are. Only thing I don't like about this is the Pac 10 being "told" you have to take Baylor if you want the other schools. I am pretty sure the Pac 10 wants CO becuase of the large media market they bring along. The various rumors are saying if this does happen you'd see ESPN/ABC, FOX, and Comcast all bidding for various rights and I had read in the past Discovery was in talks with the PAC 10 about flipping one of their channels over to the PAC 10. 

One other rumor has it if this doesn't happen you'd probably see Utah and CO both heading to the Pac 10 to fill out the league. One problem with Utah is they don't bring a large media market or Nat'l following with them.


----------



## dettxw (Nov 21, 2007)

sum_random_dork said:


> It will be an interesting week it sounds like NE and Mizzu have until the end of the week to tell the Big 12 what their plans are. Only thing I don't like about this is the Pac 10 being "told" you have to take Baylor if you want the other schools. I am pretty sure the Pac 10 wants CO becuase of the large media market they bring along. The various rumors are saying if this does happen you'd see ESPN/ABC, FOX, and Comcast all bidding for various rights and I had read in the past Discovery was in talks with the PAC 10 about flipping one of their channels over to the PAC 10.
> 
> One other rumor has it if this doesn't happen you'd probably see Utah and CO both heading to the Pac 10 to fill out the league. One problem with Utah is they don't bring a large media market or Nat'l following with them.


Our most excellent local Sports Radio station WWLS had the Texas Orangeblood's guy on this am who broke the PAC-10 expansion story for an interesting talk. Sounds like the PAC-10 will go along with Baylor over Colorado as it would be a take all of the Texas schools or none proposition (due to the internal Texas political pressure).

What I haven't heard too much about is what happens to the remaining schools - Kansas, Kansas State, & Iowa State? I wonder what they are saying in those places about their options.


----------



## Mikemok1981 (Jul 9, 2009)

dettxw said:


> Our most excellent local Sports Radio station WWLS had the Texas Orangeblood's guy on this am who broke the PAC-10 expansion story for an interesting talk. Sounds like the PAC-10 will go along with Baylor over Colorado as it would be a take all of the Texas schools or none proposition (due to the internal Texas political pressure).
> 
> What I haven't heard too much about is what happens to the remaining schools - Kansas, Kansas State, & Iowa State? I wonder what they are saying in those places about their options.


I've got 10 bucks that says Kansas goes to the big east


----------



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

dettxw said:


> What I haven't heard too much about is what happens to the remaining schools - Kansas, Kansas State, & Iowa State? I wonder what they are saying in those places about their options.


Some reports have the MWC taking on those schools plus maybe adding Boise St and another WAC school (Fresno St or Nevada seem to be the odds on choice). One benefit to the MWC would be they already have their own network which seems to be what every school wants.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I have heard rumors that the SEC might want Miami & Florida St... but it seems to me it would be easier to entice Florida to join the ACC instead.

Think about it... ACC only has to entice the one Florida school to jump... and right now, Florida would be almost guaranteed to be in the ACC title game for the next few years and likely that could guarantee a spot in the BCS bowl as well. Also, Florida has been a basketball power in recent years so they'd fit there as well.

IF the ACC did this, they could also move to bring South Carolina back into the ACC... and that would be 14 ACC teams.

I'm not saying I want this... but if the conference jumping goes viral this year, at least these two would make geographic and rivalry-related sense.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Well it has started. Tomorrow will be real Busy I think.


----------



## DBSooner (Sep 23, 2008)

Soon my friends soon.

Just in time for with USC getting hammered as well.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

DBSooner said:


> Soon my friends soon.
> 
> Just in time for with USC getting hammered as well.


My Dad is all excited, as you could Now have a Sooner(His team) vs Huskers(mom's team) Rosebowl, as the Pac10 vs Big10 Champions.

Things are going to get crazy.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

GrumpyBear said:


> My Dad is all excited, as you could Now have a Sooner(His team) vs Huskers(mom's team) Rosebowl, as the Pac10 vs Big10 Champions.
> 
> Things are going to get crazy.


NOoooo. If it happens I'll refuse to call it the *PAC*1X. Maybe the *WACKY*35 or something. If you can't have tradition in college ball, what's left?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

phrelin said:


> NOoooo. If it happens I'll refuse to call it the *PAC*1X. Maybe the *WACKY*35 or something. If you can't have tradition in college ball, what's left?


Well as I have posted before, I AM NOT A FAN of the Mega Conference's at all. Granted I am in favor for a playoff system, and the mega Conference's could put a big crimp in the BCS system, so screwing up is the silver lining in the process.

I still remember My Grandpa yelling, when they added the Arizona schools. Those guys are so dumb, they don't even know how to change thier clocks.


----------



## ARKDTVfan (May 19, 2003)

GrumpyBear said:


> Those guys are so dump, they don't even know how to change thier clocks.


at least they can count above 10 :lol:

and Colorado has already jumped west to the Pac whatever

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5271438


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

phrelin said:


> NOoooo. If it happens I'll refuse to call it the *PAC*1X. Maybe the *WACKY*35 or something. If you can't have tradition in college ball, what's left?


Phrelin,
YOU will get your Pac 8 back with all this.
Pac16 will be West and East. West will be the orignal Pac 8 and the East will be the 2 Zony states, and the other 6 new teams.


----------



## David Ortiz (Aug 21, 2006)

phrelin said:


> NOoooo. If it happens I'll refuse to call it the *PAC*1X. Maybe the *WACKY*35 or something. If you can't have tradition in college ball, what's left?


Just change the base system and it remains the Pac-1016


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

David Ortiz said:


> Just change the base system and it remains the Pac-1016


That... is... awesome!

Nobody will "get" it... but I wish I had thought to post that!


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

GrumpyBear said:


> Phrelin,
> YOU will get your Pac 8 back with all this.
> Pac16 will be West and East. West will be the orignal Pac 8 and the East will be the 2 Zony states, and the other 6 new teams.





David Ortiz said:


> Just change the base system and it remains the Pac-1016


Well that is clever, but as GrumpyBear says I'd have to settle for a conference that has the old *Pacific*-8 and the new Somewhere-Else-East-of-Us 8. It's disconcerting.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Eventually everyone will be in the NCAAinfinity conference


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

So, the great realingment scare of 2010, looks to be almost over, with only minor damage to teh world as we know it. Now Texas has an even weaker league to dominate and no pesky championship game as a hurdle to the BCS title game as well as the lions share of the money from the Big whatever. (maybe the Big Ten and Big12 just swap names now?)


Unless it all changes again.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Lee L said:


> So, the great realingment scare of 2010, looks to be almost over, with only minor damage to teh world as we know it. *Now Texas has an even weaker league to dominate* and no pesky championship game as a hurdle to the BCS title game as well as the lions share of the money from the Big whatever. (maybe the Big Ten and Big12 just swap names now?)
> 
> Unless it all changes again.


Texas hasn't dominated the league. OU has actually been in 7 of the last 10 Big 12 title games and won 6 of them, UT has been in the other 3. They've also been in more BCS games (7) than Texas (4).

It hurts typing that as a UT fan. :lol:


----------



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

Looks like it all came down to $$$ and Texas wanted to create their own network which the Pac 10 said no to. So now the Pac 10 looks towards Utah to fill out the league and possibly create their own championship game. Looks like it should all work in the end, Utah and Colorado create a nice rivarly game which is what the Pac 10 has been built on. Also gives the Pac 10 2 more large media markets in Salt Lake City and Denver. The loser could end up being Boise St if Utah leaves for the Pac 10 and TCU leaves for the Big "12."


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Wow, the more details that come out the crappier it makes the divide in the Big 12 seem. 

Looks like not only does Texas get to keep the lions share of post season money, they get more TV money than the rest of the teams.

Plus, Kansas, K State, Iowa St, Baylor and Missouri have evidently agreed to give their share of the buyout money (which I think is 7 million or something from each team that leaves) to Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma as an enticement to stay in the league.

WTF?!?


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Well, I guess they couldn't even keep it limited to schools in states that touch states that that touch the Pacific, much less states that touch the Pacific.:nono:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I'm trying to figure out why the rest of the schools in the Big "12" would agree to a deal that seems so severely sloped towards Texas in terms of revenue sharing.

The figures that have been thrown around make it seem to me like those teams would be better off letting Texas go and joining another conference where no single team has such a sweet deal.

Kansas going solo like Notre Dame would not be good... but Kansas joining pretty much any other conference might get the same money as they will after they send most of the Big "12" money to Texas.


----------



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

The real interesting part in all this is how far college basketball has fallen. You look at a shcool like Kansas with their BBall tradition and it was an afterthought in all these new leagues. The money now is all about college football. 

The one other interesting thing I heard was the fact that many people felt Texas would be a better fit in the Pac 10 not based on location but based on City of Austin itself. Austin has close ties with the Silicon Valley and is looked at as more of a West Coast style city in terms of music and food.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I don't know that basketball has dropped in popularity any more than any other sport in recent years... but rather college football has continued the cash grab for things like the "bowl tradition".

There are a lot more basketball games in any given year, and then the tourney at the end... but the cash payout has never been the same as available for those football games.

For one, football usually has less competition for eyes. Lots of basketball games means lots of choice... less football games, means each one has higher viewership.

College football also has ran circles around many pro teams... Consider the college teams that have 100,000 fan capacity stadiums vs many pro teams that don't have half that for their stadiums.

The new Cowboys stadium, for example, set a couple of attendance records getting over 100,000 a couple of times... but there have been college football stadiums doing that for a long time now.

And those bowl sponsorships for the end-of-year games... even the Random Company Grab-Bag Bowl between two 6-5 teams pays out more than some teams get for a final four appearance in basketball I think.

It's crazy... and while I know football is #1 with basketball behind that in national-popularity... I am not sure how the economics got so out of whack to make such a big gap in the potential revenue.


----------



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

CSN Bay Area is now saying that Utah will offically be a member of the Pac10(2?) tomorrow (Tuesday). So I guess the musical chairs of teams is over for a while.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

Big 12 leftovers:

The northern schools make sense. Had no real alternative. Mountain West, or Big East amalgum, neither of which would be BcS worthy. So they bend over and pretty much admit they are fieldfillers for UT and OU.

Oklahoma schools are understandable. OSU has a case of "little brother" jealousy and would do anything to remain in the same conference as OU. Could have easily ended up in the Mountain West as well. OU needs UT and is willing to give them what they want, they think they can do the same thing in Oklahoma that UT is doing in Texas relative to TV, but just do not understand the size issues.

Baylor and TTU are understandable. TTU is a much more regional school. Just its alumni and the people right in Waco follow it. Baylor is a wealthy peoples' college and has been comfortable being the Duke or Vanderbilt in Big 12 football. Easily could be in CUSA.

But TAMU. TAMU could have gone to the SEC. So you would have had TAMU, getting SEC money and telling recruits they get to play in the SEC and delivering DFW and Houston and San Antonio to the SEC on CBS. They give that away to enter into a deal where UT will have its own TV deal and get more money than it will. Permanent little brother. Once a decade they get to hoop and holler they beat UT. TAMU's leadership blew it.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

sum_random_dork said:


> CSN Bay Area is now saying that Utah will offically be a member of the Pac10(2?) tomorrow (Tuesday). So I guess the musical chairs of teams is over for a while.


If UTAH accepts, it would make for an interesting PAC-12.. How they divide the PAC into 2 divisions would create for some interesting scenarios.


----------



## sum_random_dork (Aug 21, 2008)

fluffybear said:


> If UTAH accepts, it would make for an interesting PAC-12.. How they divide the PAC into 2 divisions would create for some interesting scenarios.


Two different rumors on this one makes sense one doesn't. One has a North division of the WA and OR schools plus Utah and Colorado. The 2nd doesn't make much sense to me....it involves breaking up the California schools, Stanford and Cal go to the North with OR and WA schools and USC and UCLA go with AZ schools and Utah and Colorado. I don't see breaking up the California schools just makes no sense to me.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

This is the dumbest thing I've seen:








What's the word "Pacific" have to do with it?:nono:


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

At least by adding Utah, all the states touch. It would have really looked weird to just have Colorado out there.

Maybe they can Add Nevada and Boise fill it in.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

phrelin said:


> This is the dumbest thing I've seen:
> 
> What's the word "Pacific" have to do with it?:nono:


It hasn't had anything to do with it since 1978.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

sum_random_dork said:


> Two different rumors on this one makes sense one doesn't. One has a North division of the WA and OR schools plus Utah and Colorado. The 2nd doesn't make much sense to me....it involves breaking up the California schools, Stanford and Cal go to the North with OR and WA schools and USC and UCLA go with AZ schools and Utah and Colorado. I don't see breaking up the California schools just makes no sense to me.


That depends on how you look at it. Both scenarios make sense to me but if I had to choose a preference, I would probably prefer scenario 1 leaving the California schools in the same division. This assures there will never be an ALL-California championship game..


----------



## David Ortiz (Aug 21, 2006)

Lee L said:


> At least by adding Utah, all the states touch. It would have really looked weird to just have Colorado out there.
> 
> Maybe they can Add Nevada and Boise fill it in.


Colorado touches Arizona


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

David Ortiz said:


> Colorado touches Arizona


Corners don't count!


----------

