AQ #s

[CougarClaw]

So, If the MWC grabs a BCS slot, how would our revenues compare to the Pac-0's?

The sting of the lousy utes leaving our conference for a lousier conference will be stymied quite a bit by the MWC gaining AQ status.

[jonnylingo]

Timetable could be accelerated.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=498&sid=11177479

"The assumption has been that Colorado and Utah (if and when invited) would be lined up to begin play in the Pac-12 starting in 2012. But a report this morning claims that timetable could be accelerated.

I wrote last night that if Utah were to play in the MWC for two more seasons, the conference could count Utah's football performances in both seasons toward any BCS auto-bid qualification calculations, along with Boise State's results from the 2008 through 2011 seasons. If Utah were to leave the MWC before the 2011 football season, the MWC could only count three of Utah's four football seasons in the qualification window"

the article also cites on a different note that the coaches in the big12 don't like the championship game.

[blue42]

Actually, Greg Wrubell comments on exactly your point, 42:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=498&sid=11174974

A side note: since Colorado and Utah would not begin Pac-10 membership until July of 2012, both schools would have two lame duck seasons in the Big 12 and MWC, respectively.

As it turns out, Utah can help the cause of its current league, since any Ute football results achieved in the next two seasons would count toward the MWC's AQ qualification efforts, comprising the 2008 through 2011 seasons

The Mountain West will be able to count the performances of football power brokers BYU, Utah, TCU and now Boise State for all four of those seasons--assuming Utah stays in the MWC through the 2011-2012 athletic seasons, as appears would be the case considering the current Pac-10 timeline (according to BCS bylaws, "The (AQ status) computations will be made according to the conference's membership on Dec. 4, 2011").

I must have missed the 2012 part of the whole thing, but I have always felt Utah was a lame duck anyway.

Timetable could be accelerated.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=498&sid=11177479

"The assumption has been that Colorado and Utah (if and when invited) would be lined up to begin play in the Pac-12 starting in 2012. But a report this morning claims that timetable could be accelerated.

I wrote last night that if Utah were to play in the MWC for two more seasons, the conference could count Utah's football performances in both seasons toward any BCS auto-bid qualification calculations, along with Boise State's results from the 2008 through 2011 seasons. If Utah were to leave the MWC before the 2011 football season, the MWC could only count three of Utah's four football seasons in the qualification window"

the article also cites on a different note that the coaches in the big12 don't like the championship game.

This makes me wonder if the Pac whatever is worried about their AQ status coming up as well? They haven't been world beaters this qualifying time. I would be interested to see if someone could run the numbers for the Pac and see where they would fall.

[Lawboy]

If you are the PAC10, and your new TV deal does not kick in until 2012, you do not want to add Utah in 2011. Why split money 11 ways the last year instead of 10, and why have 11 teams in a conference where you play everyone each year. That makes no sense. You add Utah and Colorado together, realign at that time, then start with the new TV deal and revenue sharing then. If Utah jumps, it will be 2012, and I really can not see it any other way.

I still think the realignment is not done. I guarantee that the Big 10 is not done, if they can land Notre Dame. And that could mean Missouri still goes, the Big East could get raided, and then the ACC might add teams. I think this is not over yet, by a long shot.

[scott715]

The real question is how do we get AQ for 2012. We might have to add Houston in a year and possibly drop a team to secure a top 6 in the 2nd criteria. Then that team could be added back when Utah leaves. Getting the AQ for 2 years makes it easier to get it permanently.

[Mars]

Colorado said that they would join the PAC-10 the first year of the new TV deal, 2012.

But then Nebraska said that they would join the Big Ten in 2011.

Now it's looking like Colorado and perhaps Utah could be playing in the PAC-12 by 2011 as well: http://www.dailycamera.com/top-sports/ci_15298600
How would this affect the current PAC-10 TV deal?

This would hurt the MWC's BCS numbers, of course.
Utah must receive an invite before Sep. 1st, 2010 for this to occur (so there's plenty of time).