breaking up the MWC

[Peanuts the Bulldog]

What are your thoughts on this article?

http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top%20 ... mff7Q.cspx

[Fullback41]

Yeah it could happen, and my Bro In Law has been claiming its a done deal for over a year, but I'll believe it when I see it. Not sure how I feel about it, if they want to leave, ok - my only real disappointment would be if the MWC dissolved and we had to go looking to join a new conference instead of looking for others to join ours.

[Pittsburgh Nellie]

I live in SLC and have to listen to this garbage on the local crappy Sports Talk radio shows every day. First, abc4 sucks and just stirs bullshi. Second, it won't be for years to come. Third, BYU and Utah are nothing without each other. The rivalry would be there still, but nothing like now as it wouldn't have conf ramifications.

IF, and I say IF it ever did happen, it won't be for years to come. Until then, we need to see if we can score a freakin point vs BYU.

[WestWYOPoke]

Interesting article. Possible but I don't know if I see it happening. In order to expand, all Pac-10 institutions must agree to the additions which makes it difficult enough. While Utah makes some sense, the addition of Colorado makes no sense to me. It would seem Boise State would be a better geographic add unless they are concerned about their bball squad, but the way the PAC-10 is looking on the court this year they don't have room to talk. Here's how I see the restructure to happen (if it does).

Big Ten adds Pitt to go to 12. Some discussion of adding 3 to get to 14 (Missouri, Rutgers, ???) I don't think so, doesn't make as much sense as 12.

Big East in order to keep 8 football schools adds Memphis (Good for Big East basketball, not so much for football). Without Pitt Big East should NOT be in the BCS.

IF PAC-10 adds, they add Utah and Boise State.
This leaves the Mountain West with 8, may stay at 8 or look at adding Nevada and/or Fresno State.

This is all just guess work, the only move I really see happening in the next year or two is Big Ten adding Pitt (and subsequent Big East reshuffle). Anyone else have any thoughts?

[calpoke25]

For the 1,000,000,000th time, NO. Its not happening. As much as some Utah people think they are Pac-10 worthy, its not happening. Its not just what can the Pac-10 do for Utah, its what can Utah do for the Pac-10? And I don't think they do enough.

Pac-10 expansion requires unanimous support. Why oh why would USC, Cal, Washington, or UCLA want to bring Utah in? Utah doesn't offer that large of a market, (SLC is big and growing, but not really relevant compared to the market the Pac-10 already has tied down.)

Bringing in another school brings in more competition, splits up the money 1 more way. (Another point people miss when dreaming up these dream conference scenarios, is that somebody has to lose. You can't have a league where 8 teams are REALLY good. There are a certain amount of losses that have to be had.)

There is a big cultural difference...

I just can't see the presidents of all of those schools unanimously agreeing on this.

(I'm ignoring the CU part of it because I don't understand them leaving the Big-12)

This is just somebody trying to stir the pot.

[MrTitleist]

I just find this to be a very unlikely scenario. Colorado doesn't fit w/ the Pac10, IMO, as I don't think they meet the academic grade. Utah, I just can't imagine them without their goody-two-shoes sisters to the South, and I think if any MWC team is going to leave, it's TCU. They make more sense geographically to the Big12, and would give more exposure in Dallas/Ft. Worth (along w/ Baylor). I don't really see much reason for the Pac10 to expand, but you know they'll be trying to raid the MWC if it happens. It's going to be an interesting two years, and it's all going to start w/ the Big10. I'm guessing a lot of FCS teams are going to make the jump as well, UT-San Antonio, South Alabama, and possibly Georgia State have all declared they are moving up, James Madison is preparing for a move, and I'm guessing Appalachian State and Montana are soon to be in tow. 2012 is going to be an interesting year of football.

[calpoke25]

I think if any MWC team is going to leave, it's TCU. They make more sense geographically to the Big12, and would give more exposure in Dallas/Ft. Worth (along w/ Baylor).

I agree TCU is the most likely team to leave, but not for "exposure" reasons in Dallas. The Big-12 already owns that market. Texas, Texas A&M and OU rule that market. If you spend any time in Dallas, I'm sure you'd see 25 Texas hats for every TCU hat you see.

[Peanuts the Bulldog]

Interesting article. Possible but I don't know if I see it happening. In order to expand, all Pac-10 institutions must agree to the additions which makes it difficult enough. While Utah makes some sense, the addition of Colorado makes no sense to me. It would seem Boise State would be a better geographic add unless they are concerned about their bball squad, but the way the PAC-10 is looking on the court this year they don't have room to talk. Here's how I see the restructure to happen (if it does).

Big Ten adds Pitt to go to 12. Some discussion of adding 3 to get to 14 (Missouri, Rutgers, ???) I don't think so, doesn't make as much sense as 12.

Big East in order to keep 8 football schools adds Memphis (Good for Big East basketball, not so much for football). Without Pitt Big East should NOT be in the BCS.

IF PAC-10 adds, they add Utah and Boise State.
This leaves the Mountain West with 8, may stay at 8 or look at adding Nevada and/or Fresno State.

This is all just guess work, the only move I really see happening in the next year or two is Big Ten adding Pitt (and subsequent Big East reshuffle). Anyone else have any thoughts?

I had this coversation with U-Texas and A&M fans a few months ago...

I think that The Big 10 adds Mizzou. Mizzou is a perfect fit for that conference, in that Mizzou is the flagship school of the state, just like many other schools in the Big 10. Adding Pitt doesn't add any new markets, as Penn St. owns most of PA.

The big 12 is now looking for another member. According to the fans there, they don't want TCU. Another Texas school won't be voted in by the current Texas members because it would give the current texas schools more competition for players, and the non-texas schools don't want more power in that state. It'll be either, WYO, CSU, or UNM. Since I am a CSU fan, of course I think CSU makes the most sense, since we're natural travel partners with CU for all non-revenue sports.

As a result the Pac 10 feels pressure to add another two teams for a title game. They'll try for Colorado and Texas first, but won't get either. Colorado won't go because of the rivalries in the big 12, and that the Big 12 is a better football conference. This moves the look for the Pac-10 to some combination of BYU, Boise, Utah first and a remote chance of UNM, CSU, WYO, Nevada. I would bet that Utah and Boise go to the Pac-10.

This leaves The MWC with TCU, WYO, UNM, AFA, UNLV, and SDSU. I think that the MWC would add Fresno, Nevada, Houston, and SMU to go to a solid 10 team league. Of course this destroys the WAC and Conf. USA, but who cares.

[Asmodeanreborn]

I just find this to be a very unlikely scenario. Colorado doesn't fit w/ the Pac10, IMO, as I don't think they meet the academic grade.

This statement made me a bit confused. For 2010 CU is ahead academically of Oregon State, Oregon, University of Arizona, Arizona State, Washington State, and quite a bit ahead of Utah (who for that matter is ahead of ASU too). With other words - they'd be solidly in the middle academically.

I just don't think they WANT to go to PAC-10. Big 12 makes so much more sense.

[Pittsburgh Nellie]

The criteria to get into the Pac 10 are too high. You have to have certain academic and research criteria. That is why BYU = no and Utah = possibly.

Colorado fits the criteria

Texas = not a snowball's chance in hell
BYU = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
Boise State = NOT LARGE ENOUGH
Utah = the ONLY chance of MWC going
UNM = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
CSU = DOES NOT QUALIFY
UNM = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
WYO = DOES NOT QUALIFY
Nevada = DOES NOT QUALIFY!

The conference is based on a group of academic/research institutions. It would take a major veer of Pac 10 presidents to add a school based on just the football part of the equation. Whether the programs are good or not. No way the President's of the Pac-10 are going to go for that.

[WestWYOPoke]

The big 12 is now looking for another member. According to the fans there, they don't want TCU. Another Texas school won't be voted in by the current Texas members because it would give the current texas schools more competition for players, and the non-texas schools don't want more power in that state. It'll be either, WYO, CSU, or UNM.

Interesting thoughts. One would think TCU the logical choice but your points here do sound like something in the Big 12 way of thinking.

This is way out of left field and I doubt it would happen, but I'd be curious to see if they could lure a "less than average" SEC team like Mississippi State to the Big 12. Again I doubt it with the web of rivalries in the SEC, but it could be interesting.

[Peanuts the Bulldog]

The big 12 is now looking for another member. According to the fans there, they don't want TCU. Another Texas school won't be voted in by the current Texas members because it would give the current texas schools more competition for players, and the non-texas schools don't want more power in that state. It'll be either, WYO, CSU, or UNM.

Interesting thoughts. One would think TCU the logical choice but your points here do sound like something in the Big 12 way of thinking.

This is way out of left field and I doubt it would happen, but I'd be curious to see if they could lure a "less than average" SEC team like Mississippi State to the Big 12. Again I doubt it with the web of rivalries in the SEC, but it could be interesting.

Or like Arkansas a former SWC member. My only question is, why would anyone leave the SEC?

[calpoke25]

Interesting thoughts. One would think TCU the logical choice but your points here do sound like something in the Big 12 way of thinking.

This is way out of left field and I doubt it would happen, but I'd be curious to see if they could lure a "less than average" SEC team like Mississippi State to the Big 12. Again I doubt it with the web of rivalries in the SEC, but it could be interesting.

Texas, OU and A&M would love to get Arkansas back in to get the old SWC going again. But Arkansas has it made in the SEC.

[calpoke25]

Or like Arkansas a former SWC member. My only question is, why would anyone leave the SEC?

you beat me to it

[Peanuts the Bulldog]

The criteria to get into the Pac 10 are too high. You have to have certain academic and research criteria. That is why BYU = no and Utah = possibly.

Colorado fits the criteria

Texas = not a snowball's chance in hell
BYU = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
Boise State = NOT LARGE ENOUGH
Utah = the ONLY chance of MWC going
UNM = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
CSU = DOES NOT QUALIFY
UNM = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
WYO = DOES NOT QUALIFY
Nevada = DOES NOT QUALIFY!

The conference is based on a group of academic/research institutions. It would take a major veer of Pac 10 presidents to add a school based on just the football part of the equation. Whether the programs are good or not. No way the President's of the Pac-10 are going to go for that.

According to US News and World Report BYU is ranked higher (I know research is an issue there) than Utah. Utah is 126 and CSU is 128. Not a lot of difference there in my opinion.
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandrevie ... e+CO+UT+WY

[WestWYOPoke]

Boise State = NOT LARGE ENOUGH

Are you talking about straight enrollment? Or are you referring to more factors like amount of research funds, etc.

If you mean enrollment, Boise has an enrollment of 18,000+ students, this is quite a bit larger than Stanford (just under 15,000) and is not far off of Oregon (20,000) and Oregon State (22,000).

Granted this would make them the second smallest school, however Utah is only 21,000, so they aren't too far off.

[WestWYOPoke]

Or like Arkansas a former SWC member. My only question is, why would anyone leave the SEC?

Arkansas came first to my mind as well, but like you said, why would they leave the SEC. I figured if any school would leave the promised land it would be a school that has more promise in the Big 12 than the SEC, like Miss. St. (or Vanderbilt but that doesn't fit geographically or historically).

[Peanuts the Bulldog]

Boise State = NOT LARGE ENOUGH

The real negative about Boise is the fact that it's a tier 4 school. The academics are terrible there.

[fromolwyoming]

CU may fit academically and politically, but geographically? The nearest Pac-10 School would be UU in SCLC, and after that in California. While in the Big 12, the nearest is Nebraska and the farthest being one of the Texas schools. So for travel reasons, I don't see the Buffs going anywhere. And due to BYU's hard line Conservative and Mormon leanings, they would come into direct conflict with the rest of the Pac-10. Utah looks to be the only viable choice, but I don't see the Pac-10 staying at 11. And none of the other schools really fit (BSU may geographically and in Football and wrestling (I think they are a member of it is wrestling only), but not academics).

[NowherePoke]

The criteria to get into the Pac 10 are too high. You have to have certain academic and research criteria. That is why BYU = no and Utah = possibly.

Colorado fits the criteria

Texas = not a snowball's chance in hell
BYU = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
Boise State = NOT LARGE ENOUGH
Utah = the ONLY chance of MWC going
UNM = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
CSU = DOES NOT QUALIFY
UNM = DOES NOT QUALIFY!
WYO = DOES NOT QUALIFY
Nevada = DOES NOT QUALIFY!

The conference is based on a group of academic/research institutions. It would take a major veer of Pac 10 presidents to add a school based on just the football part of the equation. Whether the programs are good or not. No way the President's of the Pac-10 are going to go for that.

According to US News and World Report BYU is ranked higher (I know research is an issue there) than Utah. Utah is 126 and CSU is 128. Not a lot of difference there in my opinion.
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandrevie ... e+CO+UT+WY

Keep in mind that USN&WR is totally irrelevant to the academics that will be making this decision. It really has no bearing.

BYU's research capabilities (limited) and religious limitations on academic thought and research (not a bad thing per se, but a reality for BYU) are simply too big of a hurdle for the PAC-10. The Big-12 may be more accepting, but BYU to the PAC-10 is a no go.

Boise lacks both the academic profile and the media market to garner even the slightest consideration for the PAC-10.

The interesting question is: Why would CU leave the Big 12? The Big 12 already has a much larger revenue stream than the PAC-10 (albeit one that is shared unequally) and seems better positioned to enhance their media revenue in the future. CU already struggles financially (limited resources available from a cash strapped state) for a AQ school and a decline in conference payouts would seem difficult to swallow for the CU athletic department.

CSU lacks the the fanbase, media market, and athletic department to be considered for either at this time.

It's a difficult equation to solve. If CU could be enticed to the PAC-10 then it works out fairly easily (UU and CU to PX, BYU to Big 12). However, what if Mizzou leaves as well?