The Pac 10 still doesn't want BYU or Utah, and the MWC is garbage outside of those two teams. That said, if I were BYU or Utah, i'd be begging to stay in the MWC. It's basically a free pass to the BCS if you get a decent team together, because there is no one in the MWC to stand in your way.
Jack
· 1 year ago
What a moron. Go back to your dorm.
Lennie Collins
· 1 year ago
Who cares if the Wac 10 expands?
Regan
· 1 year ago
I just don't see the Pac-10 expanding anytime soon. Tradition is only one reason.
The Pac-10, the Rose Bowl (and the Big Ten for that matter) are steeped in tradition that occasionally means more than money. (Emphasis on occasionally)
Also, the Pac-10 is just at the bottom of the cycle right now; I doubt this would be an issue if the Pac-10 was, say 5-1 vs, the MWC instead of this year's 0-6.
I have been analyzing the effects of the increased parity in CFB and have come to a few interesting observations that actually been counter-productive to the sport. It is exceptionally amateurish and probably all wrong, but when I'm done, I'll share it with yall.
Having said that, if things stay the way they are now and the MWC's ascension continues, I would advise the teams in the MWC to continue together and become the seventh BCS conference - but that's just me.
TheMayor
· 1 year ago
Regan,
Hey, Cal beat Colorado State so make that 1-6!
Regan
· 1 year ago
%$#@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I HATE IT WHEN MY NUMBERS ARE OFF!
Gar...I can't edit it. It will stand forever on the Internet archives. Me - statistically incorrect. Curse you, DISQUS....
LOL, thanks for letting me know. I will just re-post the whole darned thing....
Regan
· 1 year ago
I just don't see the Pac-10 expanding anytime soon. Tradition is only one reason.
The Pac-10, the Rose Bowl (and the Big Ten for that matter) are steeped in tradition that occasionally means more than money. (Emphasis on occasionally)
Also, the Pac-10 is just at the bottom of the cycle right now; I doubt this would be an issue if the Pac-10 was, say 5-1 vs, the MWC instead of this year's 1-6. [edited]
I have been analyzing the effects of the increased parity in CFB and have come to a few interesting observations that actually been counter-productive to the sport. It is exceptionally amateurish and probably all wrong, but when I'm done, I'll share it with yall.
Having said that, if things stay the way they are now and the MWC's ascension continues, I would advise the teams in the MWC to continue together and become the seventh BCS conference - but that's just me.
U.of S.C.1978
· 1 year ago
Feng shui, oriental mysticism, astrology, magic. I'm not sure about the rest of you guys, but my team will win without the stadium being lifted and rotated, or re-located.
Go Cocks!!
yeah
· 1 year ago
Define what AQ means earlier in your article. Three abbreviations in a row (BCS AQ MWC) is difficult when there's no explanation provided by the author.
Ben Prather
· 1 year ago
Sorry, AQ means Automatic Qualification. I have been using this for a while here... but should still be more clear. Usually BCS AQ conferences is used in a context where the reference to the big 6 gives enough clues to its meaning. To call the other conferences non-BCS would be wrong as they are specifically mentioned in the BCS contracts and recieve BCS money. I Usually refer to them ans BCS non-AQ conferences.
Anonymous IV
· 1 year ago
I am going to assume that AQ stands for automatic qualifier. Current success on the part of the MWC over Pac-10 teams is not reason enough to expand. The author already noted that BYU does not play on Sundays and also non-revenue sports and academics have to be considered. In addition there is the question of simple geography and the current issue of fuel prices and the rise of transportation costs. The New York Times produced an article on those issues and how that is affecting sports team travel: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/sports/ncaafo...
leelandcorleon
· 1 year ago
let them go, hell with the mormon faith expanding why not let the athletic departments of the school expand too. why should they be confined to being stuck in such a limited conference. people act like the pac 10 is so amazing living off of its laurels but recently the only programs that have been making noise in football have been asu and usc. on the basketball side the conference is very strong, but utah and byu have been very tough over the years. besides outside of the upsets osu has over usc the pac ten as a whole over all is very weak. byu and utah would give the conference 2 more teams to add for the bowl season picks which is what these conferences like to brag about.
imagine
usc byu utah cal oregon asu
bowling every year and the talent pool would only grow because it would open up previously locked up areas in the mid-western west you know nm, utah, nevada, etc.
let unm, unlv, tcu, foster the load they've been living off the merits of those two utah schools for far too long anyhow.
i mean for years utep was a stomping mat for af, byu, nm, and utah in the wac in football. but when they said we're too good for you people and went mwc on everyone all it did was open the door for utep altogether creating another chance for utep to recorrect football at the school by their inclusion in c-usa and they've done better in the few years they've been in the conference.
will there be growing pains for byu and utah if they head out, yes, but hell osu, ucla, az, wash, stanford, and wash state are so great to watch on saturday's for non alumni? no not really.
let them in asu and usc needs new faces in the fall and also a more stacked pac 10 come basketball season would be awesome girls and guys.
Rio_Jay
· 1 year ago
the ONLY plan for Pac Ten expansion i have ever heard that i have liked is to have the NCAA end their USA-schools-only policy, then invite the University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University.
Both have great programs by Canadian Standards, that will need to beef up to compete in the Pac Ten, but should be able to do so relatively quickly
Ben Prather
· 1 year ago
I have not heard that one. It is an interesting one.
Cougar_Fan
· 1 year ago
Interesting article, it'll be interesting to see how the PAC 10 handles the loss of its credibility this year.
billy metz
· 1 year ago
After Texas and A & M declined years ago, the Pac-10 is now only interested in Colorado and Utah. Utah would move in a heartbeat, but CU is happy in the Big 12. If CU ever became interested, the package deal would be consumated, forming the Pac-12. The Pac-10 is not interested in BYU.
Kevin @ Fanblogs
· 1 year ago
The PAC10 never had an offer to Texas A&M, at least not in the public history as compiled by the Austin Statesman and Houston Chron. Texas was voted down behind closed doors, but supposedly was ready to spurn the Pac10 anyway because of pressure to form the Big XII.
We did a nice write up on it last year.
The_DMD
· 1 year ago
The PAC 10 NEEDS good teams. They have to expand, get a championship game, and hope that someone pays attention to them. The only problem with PAC 10 teams is that most of the country doesn't seem to care what sort of football they are playing. Outside of USC and sometimes UCLA does anyone off the WestCoast care?
They need 12 teams to make people start to pay attention to their conference and their title game as one with BCS implications.
4cornerz
· 1 year ago
If the Pac 10 expand look for Texas and Texas A &M to Go west
NMLSooner
· 1 year ago
I have always thought this was laughable. I have heard this for about ten years. But, if it were to happen, I think the Big XII should drop Baylor, be the Big 9, play an eight-game conference schedule so that OU-Nebraska is every year again. I liked it better when we played saxet in an out of conference game anyway.
Lennie Collins
· 1 year ago
It is unlikely Baylor would be dropped. I always thought TCU should have gotten picked over Baylor. I do miss the Big 8 because Oklahoma did play Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, and Colorado each year. But of course money is now the factor in college football.
Ben Prather
· 1 year ago
Thats like me saying the MWC should have picked Fresno State over SDSU, and Boise Sate over TCU. The TCU bit has not been a bad move however.
ed
· 1 year ago
The PAC 10 will never expand, yes the teams they have now aren't producing wins like their ranks said they should be, but this is just a down year. after the SEC i think the next dominant conference is the PAC 10. Utah and BYU should stay in their conference, if they move into the PAC 10 they will get lost and lose all of their publicity they get for being in a small conference.
I like the way the current Pac 10 has two teams from every region or State and all the teams play each other in football. BYU and Utah would be the only teams that could fit that now in expansion.Maybe UNLV and Nevada? Fresno State and SDSU? That would give the conference full coverage of CA with San Diego and emerging SJ Valley TV markets.
inamedmycarbrianjohnson
· 1 year ago
Nevada schools in the Pac 10? Please...
greg
· 1 year ago
Because BYU is bound by its religion it might not make sense but Boise State and Utah would be good pics for the Pac 10
Jim
· 1 year ago
It comes down to fear. You can talk the money issue all you want. BYU brings with it nationwide attention. Utah is a great school as well. The PAC 10 is afraid to get their butts kicked by BYU and Utah which we have done.
All Comments
The Pac-10, the Rose Bowl (and the Big Ten for that matter) are steeped in tradition that occasionally means more than money. (Emphasis on occasionally)
Also, the Pac-10 is just at the bottom of the cycle right now; I doubt this would be an issue if the Pac-10 was, say 5-1 vs, the MWC instead of this year's 0-6.
I have been analyzing the effects of the increased parity in CFB and have come to a few interesting observations that actually been counter-productive to the sport. It is exceptionally amateurish and probably all wrong, but when I'm done, I'll share it with yall.
Having said that, if things stay the way they are now and the MWC's ascension continues, I would advise the teams in the MWC to continue together and become the seventh BCS conference - but that's just me.
Hey, Cal beat Colorado State so make that 1-6!
I HATE IT WHEN MY NUMBERS ARE OFF!
Gar...I can't edit it. It will stand forever on the Internet archives. Me - statistically incorrect. Curse you, DISQUS....
LOL, thanks for letting me know. I will just re-post the whole darned thing....
The Pac-10, the Rose Bowl (and the Big Ten for that matter) are steeped in tradition that occasionally means more than money. (Emphasis on occasionally)
Also, the Pac-10 is just at the bottom of the cycle right now; I doubt this would be an issue if the Pac-10 was, say 5-1 vs, the MWC instead of this year's 1-6. [edited]
I have been analyzing the effects of the increased parity in CFB and have come to a few interesting observations that actually been counter-productive to the sport. It is exceptionally amateurish and probably all wrong, but when I'm done, I'll share it with yall.
Having said that, if things stay the way they are now and the MWC's ascension continues, I would advise the teams in the MWC to continue together and become the seventh BCS conference - but that's just me.
Go Cocks!!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/sports/ncaafo...
imagine
usc
byu
utah
cal
oregon
asu
bowling every year and the talent pool would only grow because it would open up previously locked up areas in the mid-western west you know nm, utah, nevada, etc.
let unm, unlv, tcu, foster the load they've been living off the merits of those two utah schools for far too long anyhow.
i mean for years utep was a stomping mat for af, byu, nm, and utah in the wac in football. but when they said we're too good for you people and went mwc on everyone all it did was open the door for utep altogether creating another chance for utep to recorrect football at the school by their inclusion in c-usa and they've done better in the few years they've been in the conference.
will there be growing pains for byu and utah if they head out, yes, but hell osu, ucla, az, wash, stanford, and wash state are so great to watch on saturday's for non alumni? no not really.
let them in asu and usc needs new faces in the fall and also a more stacked pac 10 come basketball season would be awesome girls and guys.
Both have great programs by Canadian Standards, that will need to beef up to compete in the Pac Ten, but should be able to do so relatively quickly
We did a nice write up on it last year.
They need 12 teams to make people start to pay attention to their conference and their title game as one with BCS implications.
cheehee.com