Prefer TCU to SMU.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Pac-12 expansion is now inevitable
- Thread starter Duff Man
- Start date
Prefer TCU to SMU.
I wish we could but the pressure is being applied on Scott to increase revenues to try and compete with the SEC and Big-10 so Texas is likely to never go away until they join another conference. If OU leaves that fanbase would go crazy being stuck in a conference like that.
This.
Would have to split Utah into the North I believe.
people, people, people. UH is putting the pressure on the B12. The guy asked for an introductor meeting with Larry Scott and got it. And then he "leaks" that info right before the Big12 is going to discuss expansion.
I see no real news here.
I see no real news here.
I know some will cringe at the thought, but I'd love the Pac 12 to add CSU. They don't really add anything to the conference that it doesn't already have, so unlikely to happen unless is was to prevent another P5 conference from gaining a school in the mountain region, but still like the idea.
It would give us a more natural rival and travel partner than Utah, up the level of football interest in the state, and we'd get to play them every year without having to use a non-conference game to do it.
Houston, Oklahoma, CSU, and BYU would be my ideal adds. Kansas, UNLV, and New Mexico as alternatives.
It would give us a more natural rival and travel partner than Utah, up the level of football interest in the state, and we'd get to play them every year without having to use a non-conference game to do it.
Houston, Oklahoma, CSU, and BYU would be my ideal adds. Kansas, UNLV, and New Mexico as alternatives.
Except that Scott also talked to Houston & Kansas at the time of the expansion to Pac-12 when he was looking to make it 16 and 1st pick aTm had already bolted for SEC & he needed a replacement.
I like the idea of Houston and TCU. Throw in OU and OSU for the inevitable 16 team alignment and I think that's ideal for the P16.
houston, kansas, ou, and okie state... to go to 16.
that would be interesting...
we'd be moved to an eastern division with utah and then we'd need two more from uo/osu, asu/ua, wash/wsu, i would guess.
stan/cal, usc/ucla would be locks to stay together in a western division, i think.
not my first choice, but it feels like a train coming our way.
that would be interesting...
we'd be moved to an eastern division with utah and then we'd need two more from uo/osu, asu/ua, wash/wsu, i would guess.
stan/cal, usc/ucla would be locks to stay together in a western division, i think.
not my first choice, but it feels like a train coming our way.
We'd just need UA/ASU to form an East/West, not two more pairs. Besides, the 4, 4 team pods system sounds much better.
If East/West, the original Pac-8 will stay together.
If pods, CA/ Northwest/ Mountain and then a new group of 4 we can call the Southwest.
you think the pod thing is politically viable? i am not sure.
i think the best we can hope for is to get 2 of original p8 every year.
who knows? there would be a lot of potential strength in both of those divisions but the west certainly would appear to be much stronger overall.
Last edited:
The thing that stood out most to me is that either the writer of the article or UH's AD doesn't know the word "utmost". I'm leaning towards the writer of the article.
You'd need to find a solution that preserves the new Western division's presence in California. Under the current scheduling format, we're guaranteed 3 games in California over 2 years.
that presumes we only go to p14 right? if we go to 16, then how do you put a pair of ku/houston or ou/osu in the north?
DeNiro
My Dixie Wrecked
Do the math. South is 6-2=4.
Move to the north makes the north 6+2=8
Now the south is at 4 taking 4 new teams is 4+4=8.
Now 8+8=16.
i knew there was a reason i was a liberal arts major.
DeNiro
My Dixie Wrecked
I graduated from Longmont High School. Wasn't as stabby then though.
Never gonna put Los Angeles and Texas into one side of the conference. Overloads it.
Plus, California teams are not going to agree to a format where they only play each other once every four years.
The only scheduling format that satisfies everyone is pods.
3 games against your own pod every year (maintaining the California scheduling for those 4 teams which they demand).
2 games against every other pod each year (meaning a trip to each region of the conference geography each year for everyone which all teams demand).
I don't see any other format that makes a 16-team Pac work because we're not going to an 11-game conference schedule.
Plus, California teams are not going to agree to a format where they only play each other once every four years.
The only scheduling format that satisfies everyone is pods.
3 games against your own pod every year (maintaining the California scheduling for those 4 teams which they demand).
2 games against every other pod each year (meaning a trip to each region of the conference geography each year for everyone which all teams demand).
I don't see any other format that makes a 16-team Pac work because we're not going to an 11-game conference schedule.
Houston and OU added to the South. Colorado and Utah moved to the North. Me likey....
I guess the key for us is having at least one guaranteed CA game a year, right? As long as we have at least one guaranteed we're ok and the pros (mo money!) outweigh the cons (losing some presence in CA)?
Yep.