I may be wrong here, but it is my understanding that the Big 12 does not share it's bowl winnings and some of the members of the B-12 are not happy with this situation. It is for this reason the top teams in the B-12 keep getting stronger and the rest are struggling to keep up. For that reason, I believe Mizzou, Iowa St., and maybe even Nebraska would jump at the chance to go to the B-10. TCU might not gain much by going to the B-12 if they can't get to a bowl game every year. Changes are coming for the BCS - might change everyone's outlook.
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
breaking up the MWC
- Thread starter Peanuts the Bulldog
- Start date
The best thing for everyone to do is wait and see what happens to the BCS. If by crazy chance, the MWC does get the 7th automatic bid as some say then, BYU, Utah, and/or TCU would be crazy to leave.
As others have said, the PAC-10 won't expand. You need a unanimous vote of all 10 schools and the Washington and Oregon schools will bitch if they can't play football games in the Los Angeles area every year due to recruiting.
As others have said, the PAC-10 won't expand. You need a unanimous vote of all 10 schools and the Washington and Oregon schools will bitch if they can't play football games in the Los Angeles area every year due to recruiting.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/02/09/pac-10.ap/index.html
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott said Tuesday that the window for expansion by the conference is open for the next year as the conference begins negotiations for a new television deal.
Speaking on a conference call to introduce former Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg as his new deputy, Scott talked about possibly adding new teams to the conference and launching a new television network.
Scott, the former head of the Women's Tennis Association, took over the conference last July. In his less than eight months on the job, he has seen growing interest from the membership over the possibility of adding teams for the first time since Arizona and Arizona State joined the conference in 1978.
"It is really over the next six to 12 months that we'll start having serious analysis and serious evaluations," Scott said.
While there has been major upheaval in conference alignments in recent years, the Pac-10 has remained stable for more than three decades. But with a new commissioner and television deals that expire following the 2011-12 academic year, the time is ripe for a fresh look at the issue.
"To me, the logic if the Pac-10 is going to think about expanding, now is our window," Scott said. "The reason being if you're going to consider a reconstruction of the conference, there's a value proposition associated with that. Given that we're about to have negotiations regarding our media rights, it makes sense that if you're going to do it, to do it when you can monetize it and get value from it commercially."
The Pac-10 isn't the only major conference looking at expansion. The Big Ten said in December that it would explore the possibility of adding a 12th team in the next 12 to 18 months. The SEC, ACC and Big 12 already have 12 schools, while the Big East has 16 teams for basketball and eight for football.
Scott said there have been "no serious discussions" with any schools. He said the primary factor in the decision will be finding schools that fit into the conference culturally and academically.
"I know that's of paramount importance to our presidents and chancellors," Scott said. "There are other economic and athletic considerations such as increased costs that would be involved, increased travel that would be involved, splitting the pie in more ways. You look at how that is offset against potentially greater revenue, potentially greater exposure into more markets, possible recruiting opportunities, the impact on media negotiations generally. There's a whole analysis you would go through in terms of cost benefit."
The conference is also looking at the possibility of starting its own television network. Scott said the priority in the new television deal will be to increase exposure and revenues.
"I always knew that there's a lot of interest in the possibility in a network," he said. "But that's not the only solution to achieve our overall goals."
Scott said the conference will undergo a rigorous evaluation of whether to launch a network in the upcoming months. Weiberg, who helped launch the Big Ten network, will play a big role in that process.
Weiberg said assuring wide distribution of a network is paramount to its success. The Big Ten Network had trouble getting on cable systems in the Midwest when it launched in August 2007 and was initially only available in about 17 million homes.
Within a year, it was available in about 75 million homes.
"Clearly for a network to be successful, you want it to be distributed as broadly as possible not only in the region but hopefully to have distribution that is national in scope," Weiberg said. "One has to think carefully about how to achieve that. It's fundamental to the economic success of such a network."
Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/02/09/pac-10.ap/index.html#ixzz0f5F6VFQ7
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott said Tuesday that the window for expansion by the conference is open for the next year as the conference begins negotiations for a new television deal.
Speaking on a conference call to introduce former Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg as his new deputy, Scott talked about possibly adding new teams to the conference and launching a new television network.
Scott, the former head of the Women's Tennis Association, took over the conference last July. In his less than eight months on the job, he has seen growing interest from the membership over the possibility of adding teams for the first time since Arizona and Arizona State joined the conference in 1978.
"It is really over the next six to 12 months that we'll start having serious analysis and serious evaluations," Scott said.
While there has been major upheaval in conference alignments in recent years, the Pac-10 has remained stable for more than three decades. But with a new commissioner and television deals that expire following the 2011-12 academic year, the time is ripe for a fresh look at the issue.
"To me, the logic if the Pac-10 is going to think about expanding, now is our window," Scott said. "The reason being if you're going to consider a reconstruction of the conference, there's a value proposition associated with that. Given that we're about to have negotiations regarding our media rights, it makes sense that if you're going to do it, to do it when you can monetize it and get value from it commercially."
The Pac-10 isn't the only major conference looking at expansion. The Big Ten said in December that it would explore the possibility of adding a 12th team in the next 12 to 18 months. The SEC, ACC and Big 12 already have 12 schools, while the Big East has 16 teams for basketball and eight for football.
Scott said there have been "no serious discussions" with any schools. He said the primary factor in the decision will be finding schools that fit into the conference culturally and academically.
"I know that's of paramount importance to our presidents and chancellors," Scott said. "There are other economic and athletic considerations such as increased costs that would be involved, increased travel that would be involved, splitting the pie in more ways. You look at how that is offset against potentially greater revenue, potentially greater exposure into more markets, possible recruiting opportunities, the impact on media negotiations generally. There's a whole analysis you would go through in terms of cost benefit."
The conference is also looking at the possibility of starting its own television network. Scott said the priority in the new television deal will be to increase exposure and revenues.
"I always knew that there's a lot of interest in the possibility in a network," he said. "But that's not the only solution to achieve our overall goals."
Scott said the conference will undergo a rigorous evaluation of whether to launch a network in the upcoming months. Weiberg, who helped launch the Big Ten network, will play a big role in that process.
Weiberg said assuring wide distribution of a network is paramount to its success. The Big Ten Network had trouble getting on cable systems in the Midwest when it launched in August 2007 and was initially only available in about 17 million homes.
Within a year, it was available in about 75 million homes.
"Clearly for a network to be successful, you want it to be distributed as broadly as possible not only in the region but hopefully to have distribution that is national in scope," Weiberg said. "One has to think carefully about how to achieve that. It's fundamental to the economic success of such a network."
Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/02/09/pac-10.ap/index.html#ixzz0f5F6VFQ7
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription
Peanuts the Bulldog
Active member
Things could get interesting really quickly. You have to assume that the Pac-10 will be going after at least one MWC team. I found this quote in the article most interesting, "the primary factor in the decision will be finding schools that fit into the conference culturally and academically."
That statement throws out the possibilitiy of adding Fresno, UNM, Boise, SDSU, UNLV, and Nevada. All of those losses are due to the academics of the schools.
That statement throws out the possibilitiy of adding Fresno, UNM, Boise, SDSU, UNLV, and Nevada. All of those losses are due to the academics of the schools.
So what culturally constitutes being a Pac 10 school?
Peanuts the Bulldog
Active member
MrTitleist said:
I would assume a solid research institution, with an athletic department that is well supported financially, and by the fans.
It was interesting to notice what wasn't mentioned. He didn't mention a tradition of winning.
So given that the Pac 10 has teams kind of paired off.. who would be next to follow? Obviously Utah AND BYU can't go.
Peanuts the Bulldog
Active member
MrTitleist said:
I would think it would be CSU and CU. It would fit in the natural rivalry pairs of the Pac-10. The Pac-10 would then own the Denver market.
In a perfect world, I would rather see CSU and Wyoming go to the Pac-10 and leave CU in the Big 12. That would make for a great rivalry between our schools and CU.
fromolwyoming
Well-known member
True, but then the travel costs would skyrocket. UW does at least have a fairly well supported athletic department (new skyboxes at the War should be finished by next season), and is a leading researcher into clean coal (considering the highly liberal venues in the Pac 10, don't think that would fly too well), looking into wind energy (don't see many issues there), and comes from one of the most conservative states there is (BIG red light there, me thinks, if only for the culture).Peanuts the Bulldog said:
NowherePoke
Well-known member
MrTitleist said:
They won't stick to the "pair" philosophy. Those comments clearly rule out BYU (which was always known anyway). Utah is a no-brainer. The real question becomes: who joins them. Can the PAC-10 pull CU from the Big 12?
Asmodeanreborn
Well-known member
Wyoming's nowhere close to PAC-10 academically, sorry to say so. They have a few good research programs, but they also have quite a few programs that have completely fallen apart and are complete jokes right now (Computer Science comes to mind). CSU is WAAAAAY closer in that respect.
fromolwyoming
Well-known member
True. Though I think that, with a very very very VERY low chance of CSU joining, and if they do, that might bring an end to the Border War as we know it.Asmodeanreborn said:
McPeachy
Well-known member
I hate expansion threads (see the MWCboard.com daily for instance).
From a big fish in a small pond, so a small fish in a big pond. And the money is not that much different...regardless. It is all relative (travel costs, Title IX requirements, etc.) versus income.
I say, best of luck. See ya!
From a big fish in a small pond, so a small fish in a big pond. And the money is not that much different...regardless. It is all relative (travel costs, Title IX requirements, etc.) versus income.
I say, best of luck. See ya!
Peanuts the Bulldog
Active member
fromolwyoming said:True. Though I think that, with a very very very VERY low chance of CSU joining, and if they do, that might bring an end to the Border War as we know it.Asmodeanreborn said:
If that would ever happen (doubtful) I think that the history of the Border War would help it survive. I'm assuming it would move to earlier in the season. I'd personally like that change because Thanksgiving time in Laramie is generally a pretty miserable time to watch a football game.
fromolwyoming
Well-known member
Maybe, considering we have an even older rivalry then even BYU-Utah, UT-aTm, and any of the other schools West of the Mississippi. So, it may survive, but will it be as exciting? As intense? But, that is all in the off chance that the Pac-10 would decide to settle for CSU over Utah. Though the traveling costs would probably put a dent into everything.Peanuts the Bulldog said:fromolwyoming said:True. Though I think that, with a very very very VERY low chance of CSU joining, and if they do, that might bring an end to the Border War as we know it.Asmodeanreborn said:
If that would ever happen (doubtful) I think that the history of the Border War would help it survive. I'm assuming it would move to earlier in the season. I'd personally like that change because Thanksgiving time in Laramie is generally a pretty miserable time to watch a football game.
JimmyDimes
Well-known member
Not buying the CSU is WAAAAY closer case. They have a decent vet school, but dont' make them out to be something they are not...that much better academically than Wyoming.Asmodeanreborn said:
Also, CSU is as close as Wyoming to getting a PAC10 bid which is not very. CSU has limited funds, offers the minimum requirement of sports, and doesn't exactly have great fan support. I think the PAC10 would stay at 10 before CSU gets a call.
Peace,
Asmodeanreborn
Well-known member
JimmyDimes said:
I'm not saying CSU is way closer overall to go to PAC-10, but CSU IS miles ahead of Wyoming academically in almost every regard. The School of Pharmacy is the one major exception. A CSU degree will generally be regarded as more in the real world for good reason. You have no idea how much it hurts me to admit that.
On the other hand, a degree from a certain institution never replaces actual prowess in your field.
eGriz is debating this same topic using the same info that Peanuts posted in the original post.. from that SLC news station.
http://www.egriz.com/grizboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=42856
http://www.egriz.com/grizboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=42856
Peanuts the Bulldog
Active member
MrTitleist said:
Those people are crazy if they think the MWC will invite a lower division team an invitation to a conference trying to get into the BCS. I admit they are good at their level but it is a step down from where the MWC is. If the MWC were to bring in a school from the Big Sky, I'd rather see UNC for travel purposes with CSU, WYO, and Air Force.
Missoula is in BFE to try and get to from any other MWC school. If Montana wants to get in the MWC, they need to spend some time in the WAC first.
fromolwyoming
Well-known member
Kind of a ritual, if you think about it, Considering all of the MWC teams were at one time or another in the WAC.Peanuts the Bulldog said:
