question about conference changes

Let's assume that BYU is asked and accepts membership in the Big 12, and lets also assume that :utard: get invited and accept membership in the Pac 10.



Do you think the cougars do better in the Big 12 or will the :utard: do better in the Pac 10? In other words--who has better records and opportunities?

I guess it depends based on how the conferences get aligned. I would say that BYU would fair better in the current Big 12 north right now as compared to Utah playing the current Pac 10. But if Utah gets in a division with OSU, UO, CU, WU, and WSU they would probably do better than BYU in the Big 12. Over time I would assume that BYU would be more consistent, but it would be more likely that Utah wins the Pac 10 in a down year before BYU builds the program to the point where we can win the Big 12.

Mark this down: IF :utard: joins the Pac-10, they'll be Washington State in 5 years.

Wickchad84087 wrote:
I guess it depends based on how the conferences get aligned. I would say that BYU would fair better in the current Big 12 north right now as compared to Utah playing the current Pac 10. But if Utah gets in a division with OSU, UO, CU, WU, and WSU they would probably do better than BYU in the Big 12. Over time I would assume that BYU would be more consistent, but it would be more likely that Utah wins the Pac 10 in a down year before BYU builds the program to the point where we can win the Big 12.

If recent history is an indicator, BYU is much better against the Big 12 than they are against the Pac 10. Since 1978, BYU is--



Baylor: 1-1

Colorado: 2-0

Iowa State: 0-0

Kansas: 0-1

Kansas State: 1-0

Missouri: 1-0

Nebraska: 0-0

Oklahoma: 2-0

Oklahoma State: 0-0

Texas: 2-0

Texas A&M: 2-1

Texas Tech: 0-0

TOTAL: 11-3



Arizona: 1-2

Arizona State: 2-3

California: 2-1

Oregon: 3-1

Oregon State: 2-1

Stanford: 0-2

UCLA: 3-7

USC: 0-2

Washington: 3-4

Washington State: 2-1

TOTAL: 18-24



Could be sample bias...

Wickchad84087 wrote:
I guess it depends based on how the conferences get aligned. I would say that BYU would fair better in the current Big 12 north right now as compared to Utah playing the current Pac 10. But if Utah gets in a division with OSU, UO, CU, WU, and WSU they would probably do better than BYU in the Big 12. Over time I would assume that BYU would be more consistent, but it would be more likely that Utah wins the Pac 10 in a down year before BYU builds the program to the point where we can win the Big 12.

I agree with you that division alignment would be key (probably in both parties, but moreso in the case of Utah). If it were a North-South orientation in the PAC, I think the U would be at least competitive most years (not last year, for example, where 1 and 2 came out of Oregon, but those type years are few and far between). The reason I don't think that would ever be the case is that I've heard for years (I know, heard, but still, point has merit...) that the Northwest schools wouldn't ever agree to a divisional alignment that didn't put them in the fertile recruiting beds of Nor-Cal and So-Cal. You'd never see ADs, and consequently Presidents, agree to it. If the PAC went with Utah and Colorado, I could see them having to go to an ACC-style division setup, where all geographical rivalry pairs are in DIFFERENT divisions, but all rivals play each other every year, as well as some teams from the other division (and if I understand the ACC correctly, some of the rivalies switch divisions every few years as well for balance). That way, even though you wouldn't be guaranteed two trips to Cali every year, you'd at least be guaranteed one. If that were the case, who KNOWS where the U would often end up in the PAC pecking order. I'd like to dis on them and say they'd bottom out fast, but the latest BCS win of theirs sure seems to indicate their programs' first one wasn't a fluke. They could go either direction, be a divisional contender every year, or be a once-in-a-blue-mooner like they used to be in the MWC/WAC.



Oh yeah, and P.S. PLEASE OH PLEASE put BYU in a Nebraska-and-Missouri-and-Colorado depleted Big12 North. Hello Conference Championship Game year-in-and-year-out baby!!!

If BYU gets added, I see a realignment of the Big 12, especially with TCU getting added too. I could see OU going north, Texas staying south. So we would play OU every year, which would make it really tough, at least every 2 years, if not more.



North

BYU

OU

Colorado

ISU

KSU

Kansas

Utah





South

Texas

A & M

Baylor

TTech

TCU

OSU

7th team(Houston?)



If I were the Big 12, I'd be proactive, try to keep Colorado, and look to add BYU and Utah together to replace NU and UM. Then go for TCU and Houston and become the Big 14. The PAC10 would then be screwed big time.

I wonder, has either the Big 10 or Big 12 applied for a trademark on the term Big 14 or Big 16? Might be a clue as to what they're thinking.



Edit: I'll answer my own question. The Big 12 has filed regularly for the Big 14 trademark since 1997, the most recent time being Feb 09.



http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/blogs/post.aspx?blogid=8&entry_id=6138

Florwood wrote:
I wonder, has either the Big 10 or Big 12 applied for a trademark on the term Big 14 or Big 16? Might be a clue as to what they're thinking.

I believe the Big 10 has owned the trademark for Big 14 for a number of years now. It had something to do with why they didn't change their name when they added Penn State.

And interestingly enough, while Big 14 US trademark is owned by the Big 12, The Big 16 US trademark is owned by a Canadian company, in reference to its baked goods...



http://www.trademarkia.com/the-big-16-77627800.html



Could be a windfall for the bakery.

Florwood wrote:
And interestingly enough, while Big 14 US trademark is owned by the Big 12, The Big 16 US trademark is owned by a Canadian company, in reference to its baked goods...



http://www.trademarkia.com/the-big-16-77627800.html



Could be a windfall for the bakery.

The real question is has the Big 12 used the mark in commerce. Even if the USPTO grants registration of the mark, trademark rights should not attach until the mark is used in commerce. At this point, I'd image that the Big Ten could expand to 14, being using the Big 14 name, and file to cancel the Big 12 registration for lack of use.



But my trademark knowledge is a little rusty...