Conference Expansion, etc

First, let me say that I would almost be heartbroken if the MWC, having gained so much ground in their fight for equality, were to be destroyed by the exit of even on of its members. At the same time, I would love to add Boise State, and BSU only.



With that out of the way, there been a lot of talk about the PAC10 expanding, and taking Utah along with it. Some chatter even has BYU being another likely candidate (yes, we know about the challenges of BYU not being a good fit, so please don't hijack this thread with a rehashing). It's all interesting, but is it rumor, or is the old adage "where there's smoke, there's fire" apply here?



I don't know.



And when I say "I don't know" in this instance, I mean that not only do I not know, I'm pretty sure NO ONE knows. I'm pretty sure no one has been approached about it, and certainly no one at BYU. And because of the relationship between the leadership at both schools, I have reason to believe that no one at Utah has been approached. Furthermore, I'm not sure the conversation among the PAC10 presidents has gained enough momentum to really consider approaching anyone.



I guess what I'm saying is that I think it's all conjecture right now. There are no imminent announcements. The PAC10 commissioner said it's a possibility, and every media outlet desperate for a story is trying to get as much mileage out of it as possible.



JL McGregor

Dallas TX

To be honest I'd love for BYU to get out of the MWC and beyond the grasp of the Mountain Network. The Big XII would be awesome in terms of National Exposure and recruiting. To be honest I'd rather see Boise State join the MWC rather than BYU and UTAH joining the PAC-10

I think there is much to this, but I think most of it depends on what the Big 10 does. If they expand, then the dominoes will begin to fall. If they do not expand, neither will the PAC10. Basically, those 2 conferences are attached at the hip, both have avoided getting to 12 members where they can have a conference champ game for football. But I think the Big10 saw the dollars that can be made now--and must be made--when they got there own Network in place. I think the PAC10 is modeling themselves after the Big 10 in that regard.



Now, here is where things get tricky. Will the Big 10 go to 12 or 14? If they go to 12, who do they add? Rumors are that Missouri is at the top of that wish list. Nebraska, Pitt and Rutgers are also on that wish list. But if Missouri leaps, then the Big 12 will have to add a team. I think that team will be TCU or BYU. If TCU, then things can still break BYU's way for a Big 12 invite, but only if the PAC10 then moves to add 2 new members to get to 12--just in time for its new TV deal. I think the clear favorites are Utah and Colorado--both liberal state run universities--both play on Sunday--both research universities--and both with solid athletic programs top to bottom. If Colorado does switch, then BYU is a lock for the Big 12, even over houston. As you all may recall, Houston was an old SWC member, and they got dumped back in teh day, like TCU did. I do not think they jump ahead of BYU, not when the Big 12 has 2 northern teams to replace.



I think what the Big 10 does is going to determine what happens. If they do not expand, no way the PAC10 does. And then things stay the same, unless the MWC decides to expand on its own. Which I doubt happens until their TV deal comes up for renewal in 2014.

If I were a Pac-10 president I'd push for expansion even if the Big 10 doesn't. Their basketball teams are struggling big time, they have one legitimate football program who went 8-4 last year and their revenues don't match the SEC and Big Ten's at all.



I'd add Utah and Colorado and aim for those two markets. With Colorado gone, I think the Big 12 adds TCU. Only then if the stars align will the Big Ten add Missouri opening up a spot for BYU to join TCU in the Big 12. As for the Mountain West and the WAC, combine the better teams (adding Montana) and demote the lessers to the WAC.



It would all be a big mess but new and exciting. The changes would distract everyone from the travesty of the BCS for a few years more.

ProV1 wrote:
If I were a Pac-10 president I'd push for expansion even if the Big 10 doesn't. Their basketball teams are struggling big time, they have one legitimate football program who went 8-4 last year and their revenues don't match the SEC and Big Ten's at all.



I'd add Utah and Colorado and aim for those two markets. With Colorado gone, I think the Big 12 adds TCU. Only then if the stars align will the Big Ten add Missouri opening up a spot for BYU to join TCU in the Big 12. As for the Mountain West and the WAC, combine the better teams (adding Montana) and demote the lessers to the WAC.



It would all be a big mess but new and exciting. The changes would distract everyone from the travesty of the BCS for a few years more.

I think this would be the worst scenario where BYU is left holding the bag. Kind of like what BYU did to the WAC when we formed the MWC. I think it's even likely Utah would bolt for the Pac-10, which would make us SO mad, we would drop the rivalry altogether out of protest. uh. huh. riiiiight. :skeptic:



Why isn't anyone seeing this from the REAL perspective?



Rather than admit that the BCS is exclusionary, the powers that be are going to destroy the MWC through invitations. It's a brilliant flanking maneuver! isn't the timing of this curious? Right towards the end of the evaluation period that will most likely force them to include an entire new conference they'd rather keep out.



Why include a whole new conference when they can split the revenue with at most four new non-BCS teams? BS(u), the :utard: :love: BYU :love: and TCU.



Don't admit an entire conference, just enough teams so that the best arguments for a new system are gone. No way the MWC leftovers and the WAC leftovers have any argument for admission once the top tiers are gone. Saves everyone money, adds markets.



yes it's still a conspiracy and yes everyone is still out to get us. look! black helicopters!

CougarClaw wrote:

If I were a Pac-10 president I'd push for expansion even if the Big 10 doesn't. Their basketball teams are struggling big time, they have one legitimate football program who went 8-4 last year and their revenues don't match the SEC and Big Ten's at all.



I'd add Utah and Colorado and aim for those two markets. With Colorado gone, I think the Big 12 adds TCU. Only then if the stars align will the Big Ten add Missouri opening up a spot for BYU to join TCU in the Big 12. As for the Mountain West and the WAC, combine the better teams (adding Montana) and demote the lessers to the WAC.



It would all be a big mess but new and exciting. The changes would distract everyone from the travesty of the BCS for a few years more.

I think this would be the worst scenario where BYU is left holding the bag. Kind of like what BYU did to the WAC when we formed the MWC. I think it's even likely Utah would bolt for the Pac-10, which would make us SO mad, we would drop the rivalry altogether out of protest. uh. huh. riiiiight. :skeptic:



Why isn't anyone seeing this from the REAL perspective?



Rather than admit that the BCS is exclusionary, the powers that be are going to destroy the MWC through invitations. It's a brilliant flanking maneuver! isn't the timing of this curious? Right towards the end of the evaluation period that will most likely force them to include an entire new conference they'd rather keep out.



Why include a whole new conference when they can split the revenue with at most four new non-BCS teams? BS(u), the :utard: :love: BYU :love: and TCU.



Don't admit an entire conference, just enough teams so that the best arguments for a new system are gone. No way the MWC leftovers and the WAC leftovers have any argument for admission once the top tiers are gone. Saves everyone money, adds markets.



yes it's still a conspiracy and yes everyone is still out to get us. look! black helicopters!

Don't become a monster to destroy a monster ... but don't let the monster destroy you either.



Rock [byu] Hard Place

BerliNY wrote:

ProV1 wrote:
If I were a Pac-10 president I'd push for expansion even if the Big 10 doesn't. Their basketball teams are struggling big time, they have one legitimate football program who went 8-4 last year and their revenues don't match the SEC and Big Ten's at all.



I'd add Utah and Colorado and aim for those two markets. With Colorado gone, I think the Big 12 adds TCU. Only then if the stars align will the Big Ten add Missouri opening up a spot for BYU to join TCU in the Big 12. As for the Mountain West and the WAC, combine the better teams (adding Montana) and demote the lessers to the WAC.



It would all be a big mess but new and exciting. The changes would distract everyone from the travesty of the BCS for a few years more.

I think this would be the worst scenario where BYU is left holding the bag. Kind of like what BYU did to the WAC when we formed the MWC. I think it's even likely Utah would bolt for the Pac-10, which would make us SO mad, we would drop the rivalry altogether out of protest. uh. huh. riiiiight. :skeptic:



Why isn't anyone seeing this from the REAL perspective?



Rather than admit that the BCS is exclusionary, the powers that be are going to destroy the MWC through invitations. It's a brilliant flanking maneuver! isn't the timing of this curious? Right towards the end of the evaluation period that will most likely force them to include an entire new conference they'd rather keep out.



Why include a whole new conference when they can split the revenue with at most four new non-BCS teams? BS(u), the :utard: :love: BYU :love: and TCU.



Don't admit an entire conference, just enough teams so that the best arguments for a new system are gone. No way the MWC leftovers and the WAC leftovers have any argument for admission once the top tiers are gone. Saves everyone money, adds markets.



yes it's still a conspiracy and yes everyone is still out to get us. look! black helicopters!

Don't become a monster to destroy a monster ... but don't let the monster destroy you either.



Rock [byu] Hard Place

earlier this year I started a thread that was essentially this question. If you BYU was offered to join the BCS, would we join the monster, or continue to fight it. overwhelmingly people on this board chose to become the monster.

If a PAC10 of Big 12 invite comes, you accept it. Not because it gets you in a BCS Conference for football, but because it gets you in a better conference when it comes to competition, reputation, and finances for all sports. It is about bettering BYU in those regards. Getting the MWC in the BCS helps with football, but with no other sport. Getting in those conferences helps across the board for all sports. I;d rather have MIssouri come to Provo than SDSU. Or Iowa State than New Mexico. Or Nebraska than Air Force. Etc. For any sport.

CougarClaw wrote:

[ is still out to get us. look! black helicopters!

Don't become a monster to destroy a monster ... but don't let the monster destroy you either.



Rock [byu] Hard Place

earlier this year I started a thread that was essentially this question. If you BYU was offered to join the BCS, would we join the monster, or continue to fight it. overwhelmingly people on this board chose to become the monster.[/quote]



That's because staying to fight the monster might just leave you between the rock and the hard place. :sick:

I don't think we give BYU enough credit in these conference expansion discussions. The thing that drives all of this talk is money. If the PAC was satisfied with their money intake then they, nor any other conference, would ever talk about expansion. Why fix it if it isn't broken? Why did the MWC break out of the WAC? Money. Why do we have the MTN network? Money. Why is the Big 10 talking expansion? Money.

BYU is a money maker. Why does BYU consistently play PAC teams? It's because word has gotten out amongst the PAC AD's that playing BYU is almost a guaranteed sell out. I heard Holmoe on KSL talking about an experience he had at UCLA. He was on the field before the game talking with UCLA's AD and he commented to Holmoe on how impressed he was with how well BYU travels. Holmoe pointed to the sea of blue and said these are your people, not ours. These are BYU fans from your neighborhood.



So we can come up with lots of reasons why the PAC would never invite BYU, but the one reason why they would is because BYU brings in money. And that one reason outweighs all of the other negative reasons by far.



That being said, I really don't think anybody knows at this point if/when/who the BCS conferences will expand. I mean the "Utah, Colorado, BYU, BSU all being considered to join the PAC-10" talk is as old as the hills. It's nothing new in the least.

What's this stuff I'm hearing about the Big 12 wanting BYU to be a part of their conference if Colorado leaves??? Anyone have any insight???



I'm so sick of these type of rumors. They always start up in the off season and never carry through regular season.

Is it that difficult to not play on Sunday? The Mt. West does it now.



It seems like a pretty minor detail to get in the way of catapulting the Pac-12 to near the front of the line in both football and basketball. The Pac-10 is clearly floundering. Do they want to stay as is and possibly get passed up by the Mt West (with BSU added) or act now?



Interesting to see what they do. I predict they do the wrong thing, whatever that is.

ProV1 wrote:
Is it that difficult to not play on Sunday? The Mt. West does it now.

I totally agree. I've never thought this excuse was legit. The PAC never schedules basketball tournament games to be played on Sunday and football never schedules games on Sunday. Adding BYU and scheduling all of their games to be played on non-Sundays would be a piece of cake.



In my opinion the only reason the PAC would pass on BYU would be because of the church and the whole Prop-8 mess. Because of this there would be a lot of pressure on the California school presidents to vote NO on BYU inclusion.

Mars wrote:


Over the next 5-10 years, I see:

The PAC-10 not expanding

The Big Ten not expanding

The Big XII not expanding

The SEC not expanding

The ACC not expanding



That doesn't sell newspapers though.

The Big 10 will expand; count on it.

Jar Drew interview Val hale on the matter. Read it here:

http://blogs.sltrib.com/byu/index.php?p=11079&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1



The gist is that Sunday play is a huge issue, mostly for TV revenues, but if it is about gate receipts, BYU is the easy choice.



I think BYU ends up in the Big 12 before the PAC10.

Lawboy wrote:
Val hale

That says all you need to know.

mcgregor wrote:

Val hale

That says all you need to know.

My law partner plays tennis often with Val, and likes him a great deal. He may not have been the best AD BYU ever had, but he is a good guy all the same. And I expect that what he said would be echoed by Rondo Felhberg as well.

Lawboy wrote:

Lawboy wrote:
Val hale

That says all you need to know.

My law partner plays tennis often with Val, and likes him a great deal. He may not have been the best AD BYU ever had, but he is a good guy all the same. And I expect that what he said would be echoed by Rondo Felhberg as well.

I'm sure some people liked him, but he managed to run BYU athletics into the ground, and created a LOT of enemies along the way.