SuperiorBuff
Well-Known Member
**** you!
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
No, Title IX is why.
I'm not sure I can see there being a Cal Pod. I do agree that there are some old relationships there, but from a conference standpoint, I think the school would like nothing more than to see a North California versus Southern California championship, which would never happen with an entire Cal pod. I could actually see pods like this:
South: Arizona, ASU, UCLA, USC
North: Cal, Colorado, Stanford, Utah
NW: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, WSU
East: Houston, Kansas, Oklahoma, TCU
The Arizona school would definitely go for this, Colorado and Utah would love it and California schools still keep their natural rivals. The only schools it hurts is NW, who lose a California school in their pods.
One thing with expansion is that the country is changing. You've got to follow the demographic shifts and think to the future. Nevada is about to pass Kansas in population. Zero P5 schools in NV compared to 2 in KS. That's antiquated.
And to give an idea of how stupid the Big 12 was on the last round: West Virginia has a negative population growth rate, makes no geographic sense, is the smallest state population that has a P5 program, and brings nothing good to the table on the conference's academic reputation. Biggest head scratcher in all of what has gone on.
And to give an idea of how stupid the Big 12 was on the last round: West Virginia has a negative population growth rate, makes no geographic sense, is the smallest state population that has a P5 program, and brings nothing good to the table on the conference's academic reputation. Biggest head scratcher in all of what has gone on.
The problem is that in this scenario there is no way to allow the Cali schools to all play each other every year without breaking the system.
I have to agree with this - KU probably doesn't move the needle as much as we might think it would.
OTOH, there is the standard argument that Nevada is already Pac-12 territory. From that POV, the Nevada schools don't really move the needle, either.
Let's expand to Canada!
The UBC Thunderbirds, Alberta Golden Bears and Calgary Dinos are perfect for the Pac-12. No excuses, make it happen!View attachment 19936
Great point. Canadians would love to get into Pac-12 Football.
What's the fascination with KU being part of an expanded P12? Is it strictly basketball related?
Market and fan base.
Agreed. Only logical scenarios that I can come up with to keep California in play for all schools post expansion is
- the pod system, but teams wouldn’t play in LA every year
- do the stupid thing the Big 10 did a few years back and make two divisions irrespective of geographic location; or
- add more California schools. I don’t see this as a real option. The current Cali schools, I assume would protest, and you would be looking at adding SDSU (which I am in favor of), and schools like Fresno or San Jose. Yuck.
Lawrence is a big market? I get there are a lot of KU basketball fans, but football has to be one of the lowest, right?
Kansas City. Their football fan base is hard to judge because of they have been so bad. Also Lawrence is actually a cool college town. Basketball is a blue blood which could add a ton of value to a network during the winter months with so many games taking place.
Jayhawks fans are also rabid. They will not only travel extremely well, boosting ticket sales, but they will make sure to utilize any medium they can to watch their team.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Can't the P12 add UC-Santa Barbara? It would be a righteous P12 destination.
If UT-San Antonio can spark up a football team, why not the UCSB Gouchos?
If UT-San Antonio can spark up a football team, why not the UCSB Gouchos?
The thing to consider with Nevada is that it's at 2.9 million people, which would make it one of the smallest states with a P5 program. If you look at states with under 4 million people in 2015:
Oklahoma 3.9 million - 2 P5 programs (4.26% growth, 20th in US)
Connecticut 3.6 MM - 0 P5 (0.47%, 44th)
Iowa 3.1 MM - 2 P5 (2.55%, 29th)
Utah 3.0 MM - 1 P5 (8.40%, 4th)
Mississippi 3.0 MM - 2 P5 (0.84%, 41st)
Arkansas 3.0 MM - 1 P5 (2.14%, 31st)
Kansas 2.9 MM - 2 P5 (2.05%, 33rd)
Nevada 2.8 MM - 0 P5 (7.05%, 6th)
New Mexico 2.1 MM - 0 P5 (1.26%, 39th)
Nebraska 1.9 MM - 1 P5 (3.82%, 25th)
West Virginia 1.8 MM - 1 P5 (-0.48%, 50th)
Idaho 1.7 MM - 0 P5 (5.57%, 10th)
HI, NH, ME, RI, MT, DE, SD, ND, AK, VT, WY between 600k-1.4 MM - 0 P5 programs
For the current and future US, I can't see any justification for MS, KS and IA having two P5 programs. Connecticut should, especially since it pulls some of the NYC market. Nevada should. North Carolina should not have 4 with a population of 10 million when California has 4 with a population of 39 million, but California could justify going to 5 considering the size of San Diego. Ohio, with 11 million people should have 2. Etc.
If I was going to re-draw the P5 map, I'd keep all this in mind. For the Pac-12, I'd be looking very hard at demographic growth trends in addition to current populations. I'd also want to maintain geographic sensibility.
Top 10 states by growth rate:
1. North Dakota (too small at under 900k people)
2. Texas (27.5 MM, 9.24%)
3. Colorado (5.5 MM, 8.50%)
4. Utah (3.0 MM, 8.40%)
5. Florida (20.2 MM, 7.82%)
6. Nevada (2.9 MM, 7.05%)
7. Arizona (6.8 MM, 6.82%)
8. Washington (7.2 MM, 6.63%)
9. South Carolina (4.9 MM, 5.85%)
10. Idaho (1.7 MM, 5.57%)
Oregon is #16 and California is #17.
I think if I'm Larry Scott, I strongly consider grabbing UNLV. But I need to get into Texas.
My ideal would be UNLV, UT, OU and either TTU or UH (UT can pick).
But maybe OU and UT aren't available. Then I start looking at UNLV + UH, TTU and TCU.
And maybe I look hard at SDSU and Boise State in order to keep the power the Texas school(s) would wield to a minimum.
Finally, part of me always goes back to New Mexico since it's a land bridge to Texas and the population is concentrated enough in the ABQ/Santa Fe area (well over half the state's people) that it could be justified.
Could we do UNLV and New Mexico with 2 schools from Texas and own the map of the west?
Last edited:
I like your idea, and I see why getting into Texas makes sense, I just don't like having to bring Texas back into the away scheduling. I guess I would rather stay in the Mountain/West even if that meant not cashing in on Texas media markets.
Too bad BYU is such a pain, I would love to ditch our fake rivalry with Utah.
In your scenario of UNLV, NM, and 2 Texas schools, would CU be paired with NM as a travel partner? UNLV is 5 hours from Salt Lake and 8 from Albuquerque.
All academic at this point, but just wondering.
That's what makes sense to me. There's a big connection between SLC and Las Vegas anyway, since the LDS is behind the banks that built much of the Strip. And ABQ is an hour shorter drive from Boulder than driving to SLC. I think you'd have to do travel partners that way.
Any expansion that doesn't include at least one of Oklahoma or Texas just doesn't make sense to me.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
It's not a rivalry though, right?
I don't subscribe to the theory that anything good for CSU is bad for CU.
If we're being honest, it's not that CSU doesn't deserve it. The school is trying to do everything that it can; supports athletics, hires the best staff they can afford, new stadium, etc.
It's that their fans don't deserve it.
Keep fighting the good fight, man.
Well, you can't put the states of CA and TX in the same side of the conference or you unbalance things in a way that will eventually destroy a Pac-16. So we couldn't go North-South.
So you have to end up with the old Pac-8 (Cal, Furd, UCLA, USC, UO, OSU, UW, WSU) in the Pac-16 West.
But we have to balance that. This old Pac-8 has a hyperelite in USC along with 2 traditional Top 25 programs in UW and UCLA along with 2 current elites in Stanford and Oregon.
ASU and CU are traditional Top 25 programs that balance UW and UCLA but are a bit lower. Utah and Arizona are on the same level as if you average out Cal/WSU, but a bit above. Let's say that balances.
Where that leaves us is having to match USC/UO/Stanford/OSU out of the East.
@Darth Snow is absolutely correct. You can't do it without OU or UT... and you probably need both. They're both hyperelites, so you could put any other 2 schools with them and it works (except **** bailer!, they're blackballed).
Yes and no. You need the Texas media markets to make this work. There are avenues to that which don't include the Longhorns.
We aren't getting a big payday by adding Houston and SMU.
We are if they come along with Oklahoma. The key is that we get 1 of the 2 hyperelites in the region. UT can probably command the entire Texas media market on its own, but OU would do a ton for Dallas and could reach the rest of the state with some other partners. I might make sure it happens. OU plus UH, TCU and TTU. No way that PACN wouldn't be on every basic cable tier in the region. And if you have those kinds of inroads into both CA and TX, the national outlets like DirecTV have to play ball.