Utah to PAC-12 not a done deal?

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/Dickey-Latest-additions-to-Pac-10-Conference-not-all-positive-101138474.html



Wouldn't that be great if Utah doesn't get their invite after all. Utah as the 12th member of the MWC would change a lot.

Part of it is based on academic grounds. Among major conferences, the Pac-10 is the best academically, largely because of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. “Colorado is on a par with Oregon,” he said. “Utah isn’t even in the picture.”



former Chancellor Young also feels the existing Pac-10 has a geographical sense.

I was wondering how long it would take someone to find that article. :roll:

MWC adds Houston and UTEP forcing the Utes and the Buffs to put their tail between their legs and go to the WAC where BYU plays them in football as an independent and basketball as a WAC member.



Finally it's all coming together!

MTM wrote:
I was wondering how long it would take someone to find that article. :roll:

HAHA! Rest assured MTM, I would be VERY surprised if the invitations are revoked. This guy seems like he's just a bitter, proud old man whacking people with his cane to try and get heard.



Also, under your name it says you are a BLUEshirt. Question: Do you actually own any blue shirts?

I believe it is a done deal, and that Utah signed a deal with the PAC. Plus, if the PAC bailed now, Utah gave notice to the MWC of it's intent to leave and has major grounds for a lawsuit. This type of thinking is silly really. Utah is in, the deals are signed with PAC. Larry Scott gave the formal invite in SLC on TV no less..

Lawboy wrote:
I believe it is a done deal, and that Utah signed a deal with the PAC. Plus, if the PAC bailed now, Utah gave notice to the MWC of it's intent to leave and has major grounds for a lawsuit. This type of thinking is silly really. Utah is in, the deals are signed with PAC. Larry Scott gave the formal invite in SLC on TV no less..

I too believe it is a done deal; but I'm sure that the contract signed says "subject to the approval of the University Presidents." So there could technically be a way out without a lawsuit, but that way out would be "technical" and not "probable."

I didn't believe it either except for it was a SF newspaper and they quote the former Chancellor of UCLA who is a big name in California. He makes some good points about why it is a bad deal. If the deal is not approved that would create a lot of chaos. It could save the WAC, it could strengthen the MWC. It could open a spot in the Big 12 for us.

His points were stupid. He was probably opposed to ASU and UA joinging back in the 70's, too. Old man, clueless. By the way, his argument smacks BYU just as much as Colorado and Utah, so I think he is past his time. Arrogant SoCal guy.

It was an SF paper with a link to Keith Olberman. So I wouldn't take anything from this. Most people execpt those from places like this (SF-where pop is the new enemy and "medical brownies" will soon be a vending machine best seller) even know Keith is still on TV-although I kinda see this as a tree in the woods situation. If Keith is on TV and nobody watches, is he really there and does he really make noise?