ESPN reports that Colorado to Pac 10 . the Big 12 is over

BYU made a great decision to wait on Boise.... Boise has no choice to wait on us, while we see what happens with the remains of the Big 12.



What does this mean? No Big 12 = 1 less BCS conference.... (the mountain west seemingly could waltz into that vacancy since they're the incumbant) There is no way that simple expansion is enough to warrant 2 auto bcs bids for these new conferences... (congress would be all over that) thus the possibility of a playoff increases tremendously which is great for football.



No Big 12 = Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri are now scrambling....



The Mountain West is now in a position of leverage and strength.



Utah = not as desirable as they thought.....



There are going to be some terrible terrible teams in the new Pac Mammoth. (do colorado, washington state, etc. think that they're going to compete with the Texas and Oklahomas? nope, they just become more and more irrelevant when the dust settles)

Apparently this was a preemptive move by CU and and the Pac to avoid getting into a tussle w/ Texas lawmakers over Baylor, although Baylor is just as good academically and better in sports overall than CU. Smart move by CU and Pac 10 though.



It looks like the pieces are falling in place for Utah to go to the Pac 10, if the other five choose not to, which again opens the possibility to us going to the Big 12, if they choose to try and stay intact. However, I don't really see that happening. I think it all pretty much hinges on where Texas decides to go. NU made the first move, now it depends all on where Texas decides to go that will determine where the remaining pieces fall. There are still a ton of reports out there of the deals that have been offered to Texas from the Big 10, to the SEC and of course the Pac 10. Hell, maybe the MWC ought just throw one out there just to say we tried.

It's funny how all of this could be leading to a stronger MWC and automatic BCS bid. Sometimes it benefits to just sit back and let the pieces fall in your lap.

BYUgrad03 wrote:
Apparently this was a preemptive move by CU and and the Pac to avoid getting into a tussle w/ Texas lawmakers over Baylor, although Baylor is just as good academically and better in sports overall than CU. Smart move by CU and Pac 10 though.



It looks like the pieces are falling in place for Utah to go to the Pac 10, if the other five choose not to, which again opens the possibility to us going to the Big 12, if they choose to try and stay intact. However, I don't really see that happening. I think it all pretty much hinges on where Texas decides to go. NU made the first move, now it depends all on where Texas decides to go that will determine where the remaining pieces fall. There are still a ton of reports out there of the deals that have been offered to Texas from the Big 10, to the SEC and of course the Pac 10. Hell, maybe the MWC ought just throw one out there just to say we tried.

Adding Colorado likely means that Baylor is out (it'll be osu, oklahoma, a+M, texas, colorado, and texas tech) - so much for the thought that the Pac 10 would look like hypocrits by inviting Baylor...



Utah (like Missouri) ends up with the cold shoulder... So the Pac 10 doesn't have to involve themselves with any religious institutions like Baylor or a school like Utah that still have a very strong LDS affilitation...



I think the Pac 10 doesnt' yet realize that eventually the balance of power shifts to Texas... which is EXACTLY WHY NEBRASKA BAILED (and why missouri wanted out). USCs current probation and penalties only helps to guarantee that Texas is the new epicenter of that conference. (this will severely handicap the upper northwest teams)

One thing I don't understand is how simply preemptively adding CU solves the Baylor issue for the Pac 10. The Texas lawmakers still hold the fate of the Texas public schools in their hands, and if they don't want the schools to go without Baylor, I would think that the state lawmakers could block any Texas movement. In that case, the Pac 10 might have to pay the price uninvite CU.

Mingjai wrote:
One thing I don't understand is how simply preemptively adding CU solves the Baylor issue for the Pac 10. The Texas lawmakers still hold the fate of the Texas public schools in their hands, and if they don't want the schools to go without Baylor, I would think that the state lawmakers could block any Texas movement. In that case, the Pac 10 might have to pay the price uninvite CU.

That would be hilarious if Texas legislature forces the Pac 10 to do their bidding and take a religiously affiliated school and Colorado gets the eventual boot after thumbing their nose at the Big 12 then comes begging at the MWC scraps.



Colorado to the MWC makes a lot of sense so I'd be all for it and there's no doubt that Texas will run the new Pac mammoth; I hope the USCs and UCLAs of the world realize who's boss now. (the upper northwest teams are going to be rendered irrelevant in time)

craigoscarson wrote:

One thing I don't understand is how simply preemptively adding CU solves the Baylor issue for the Pac 10. The Texas lawmakers still hold the fate of the Texas public schools in their hands, and if they don't want the schools to go without Baylor, I would think that the state lawmakers could block any Texas movement. In that case, the Pac 10 might have to pay the price uninvite CU.

That would be hilarious if Texas legislature forces the Pac 10 to do their bidding and take a religiously affiliated school and Colorado gets the eventual boot after thumbing their nose at the Big 12 then comes begging at the MWC scraps.



Colorado to the MWC makes a lot of sense so I'd be all for it and there's no doubt that Texas will run the new Pac mammoth; I hope the USCs and UCLAs of the world realize who's boss now. (the upper northwest teams are going to be rendered irrelevant in time)

I'm pretty sure there's going to be a fight even if CU announces... the Texas lawmakers won't back down. If they're like most Texans I know, then they truly buy into the state marketing tagline:



http://msp325.photobucket.com/albums/k375/TexasCasey/dont.jpg" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

craigoscarson wrote:
Adding Colorado likely means that Baylor is out (it'll be osu, oklahoma, a+M, texas, colorado, and texas tech) - so much for the thought that the Pac 10 would look like hypocrits by inviting Baylor...

I guess they chose to go the other way with it... to look like hypocrites for saying how important academics are to them and then inviting the Buffs into the conference after getting slapped for APR violations.



But then again, maybe they chose the higher road as opposed to looking like hypocrites for not welcoming in another rogue athletic department that puts winning ahead of all else at all costs (USC, Oregon).

gmj81 wrote:

Adding Colorado likely means that Baylor is out (it'll be osu, oklahoma, a+M, texas, colorado, and texas tech) - so much for the thought that the Pac 10 would look like hypocrits by inviting Baylor...

I guess they chose to go the other way with it... to look like hypocrites for saying how important academics are to them and then inviting the Buffs into the conference after getting slapped for APR violations.



But then again, maybe they chose the higher road as opposed to looking like hypocrites for not welcoming in another rogue athletic department that puts winning ahead of all else at all costs (USC, Oregon).

I was always a little bitter against the Pac-10 but it really seems like they've bent over backward to AVOID anything with a religious spin. They've used somewhat drastic measures to avoid BYU and now Baylor for what can only be called academic or liberal bigotry.



Obviously they can pick whomever wants to be part of their conference, but inviting Colorado so they're not forced to invite Baylor (for the same reasons they dislike BYU?!) seems to reveal the nasty underbelly of this hypocritical group. Colorado does not bring a strong sports program, has a history of academic, NCAA, and legal violations and does nothing more than add money as well as act as a lever for bringing the "right" schools into the conference.



That's a terrible criteria.



If I were BYU or Utah, I'd turn down any invitation to avoid being associated with such a group. money or not. well, maybe Utah is a fit. but BYU certainly does not. The Pac-10 makes me sick.

Baylor has way more research aspects than BYU, including a very good medical school. Baylor, in that regard, is a better fit than BYU with the PAC10. But the religious stuff must really matter to the atheists at Cal. Stanford is more conservative, and have many BYU grads as students and faculty, but considering they are a Bay area locale, tat does not help. Thea Bay area really is a liberal shangri-la.

Thing is, by going "behind Texas' back" to get CU in, they may have just cost themselves the crown jewel in Texas. If they're OK with that based on their "principles", good for them. But I'm guessing they are trying to call Texas' bluff that they won't still jump on board. And like the Slogan goes, you "Don't Mess With Texas" (the state or the school).



I'm sorry, I just don't see what the advantage is to joining the Pac-10. They'll get another huge TV contract if they stay in the Big XII even without Nebraska or CU or Missouri if they decide to bolt. The Big XII North is irrelevant and has been for years.

Texas is going to get forced to leave Baylor Behind. It looks like OSU is getting the next invitation.