Pac-10 to invite 6 Big 12 schools

[InTheBuff]

Here's how I'd do it-

Have 4 'pods' or divisions-

USC, UCLA, CAL, Stanford

Washington, Wazzu, OU, Oregon St

Texas, A&M, OU, Okie St

Colorado, Tex Tech (I prefer Utah) , ASU, Zona

Play all 3 every year in your 'pod'
plus play two from each other 'pod' ... one home , one away in a rotating fashion
This would leave 3 OOC games.

Winner of each 'pod' plays for right to Pac 16 Championship Game
highest ranked team hosts lowest ranked ..
example- USC #3, OU #7, Oregon #11, CU #13
USC hosts CU - OU hosts Oregon- winner goes to neutral site for Pac 16 Championship


Here would be an example Colorado schedule-

CSU - Denver
SAN JOSE ST
@ Illinois
UCLA
@ Oregon St
Texas
Arizona
@ Stanford
@ Okie St
Washington
@Asu
TEXAS TECH (or UTAH)

With a schedule like this the Pac 10 teams get their rival game plus each team get exposure in
every region each year-

 

[Unleash Hell]

AAAAIIIIIIEEEEEE!!!!!

I'm not getting through to you, am I? We suck because of our administration, but we're handicapped because of our affiliation with Texas. It wouldn't matter how much our administration was committed to winning because UT will ALWAYS outspend us. ALWAYS. If we build the most fabulous facilities on the face of the Earth, UT will build them a little bigger and a little better. If we pay our head coach $5MM, they'll pay theirs $10MM. It's a race we cannot possibly hope to win.

Sacky you're right, we aint ever gonna be like Texas, not even close, however we could be making more than double our annual net income currently.

 

[B1Buff]

First...this isn't happening, Utah will not be left out. On the positive...the only constant in the Pac-10 expansion conversation is us and Utah...**** the rest. UT will be lobbying to have their own network and the Pac won't allow it as they are going with the conference network scenario...UT only cares about UT and I dont' see the pac and UT coming to agreeable terms.

Second, all opposed with the idea that this would be a bad move (if it were even a realistic option) because UT will dominate the division...get real and stop acting like a bunch of pussies. We might as well join the MWC with that attitude and play a weak ass schedule every year. Get up and play with the big dogs and build a competitive program with the $20M/year (get a new coach)...**** Texas.

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

OK, first off, the majority of the schools in the Big 12 are not in Texas. A third of them are, though. Half the schools are not in either Oklahoma or Texas. When the conference first was formed, the thought was that adding in the Texas teams would be good for everybody, but they ended up sucking the life out of all of the original Big 8 save for maybe OU. And lets not fool ourselves here, if not for Bob Stoops, OU would suck just as bad as we do. OU hit the jackpot when they hired him.

Texas is a disease. A cancerous lesion. A virus. They attack healthy conferences and suck them dry. By themselves, they might not be so dangerous. Combine them with OU, OSU, Tech and A&M, they would dramatically alter the Pac 10. Bad move by the Pac, bad move for CU.

I'm hoping one of two things happen. First, this story is a load of bull and there isn't a shred of truth to it. Two, UT has too much to lose by agreeing to such a deal and decides to leverage the invite into an SEC invite and they go there.

In the end, CU is better in this scenario than they would be if they got left at the altar, but only marginally.

I think there are too many obstacles for this to happen and I think UT would go independent first.

I never said the majority of the schools were down south, I said the majority of the power was down south it always has been and always will be. College sports aren't what they were when CU as on top of the Big 8 anymore. A lot of people need to get used to that idea. CU will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage if it wants to play witht the big boys, whether we're with the Texas schools, or the California schools. CUs goal right now needs to be to STAY with the big boys and maximize it's money regardless of who it's in a conference with. I guarantee the Cali schools aren't about to let Texas suck the life out of anything in this scenario. It's apples and oranges comparing what Texas did to the Big XII and what they could do to the Pac 16. There's no one in the Big XII north capable of standing up to the south schools, on any playing field financially. That changes a great deal when you're talking about setting them up in a conference that carries LA and San Francisco as a foil to Texas.

To call this 'marginally' better for CU is a purely emotional reaction and doesn't even begin to scratch the benefits this will bring to CU. Just the additional money from the TV contract this could generate in one year is enough to give CU a jump in facilities, and potentially allow CU to bring in additional sports to compete in. Baseball and softball anyone? The alumni base on the west coast and in Arizona FAR outnumbers anything east of Denver combined. The boost this will bring by exposing alumni back to the school will be a huge boost too. Does it suck that CUs not left in a western conference with a bunch of scrubs to beat up on and to have to compete with the AZ schools, sure it does. Is it better for the AD and the school as a whole, you bet it is. ****, if it weren't for the Denver TV market, CU isn't inculded in ANY of these expansion discussions and we're left out in the cold with ISU, KSU and KU. CUs not exactly ina position to be choosey.

All that said, Rivals sure is drumming up quite a bit of pub and probably business with all this right now.

 

[sackman]

Sacky you're right, we aint ever gonna be like Texas, not even close, however we could be making more than double our annual net income currently.

Us making double what we're making now is irrelevant if our competition is making three times what it's making now. It's all a matter of scale. I think we actually fall farther behind the rest of College Football by making this move.

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

First...this isn't happening, Utah will not be left out. On the positive...the only constant in the Pac-10 expansion conversation is us and Utah...**** the rest. UT will be lobbying to have their own network and the Pac won't allow it as they are going with the conference network scenario...UT only cares about UT and I dont' see the pac and UT coming to agreeable terms.

Second, all opposed with the idea that this would be a bad move (if it were even a realistic option) because UT will dominate the division...get real and stop acting like a bunch of pussies. We might as well join the MWC with that attitude and play a weak ass schedule every year. Get up and play with the big dogs and build a competitive program with the $20M/year (get a new coach)...**** Texas.

Utah's not going anywhere without BYU, I think you'll be surprised to see Utah on the outside looking in regardless of how the expansion thing settles out. It would take an act of God for Utah's state government to allow Utah to do anything without BYU. And if Utah did go off on it's own, it could kiss it's state funding goodbye.

 

[Duff Man]

All for it. Would LOVE for this to happen!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[B1Buff]

Utah's not going anywhere without BYU, I think you'll be surprised to see Utah on the outside looking in regardless of how the expansion thing settles out. It would take an act of God for Utah's state government to allow Utah to do anything without BYU. And if Utah did go off on it's own, it could kiss it's state funding goodbye.

BYU is a private school...although it has a lot of influence, that isn't as big of an issue as you may think.

 

[sackman]

Utah's not going anywhere without BYU, I think you'll be surprised to see Utah on the outside looking in regardless of how the expansion thing settles out. It would take an act of God for Utah's state government to allow Utah to do anything without BYU. And if Utah did go off on it's own, it could kiss it's state funding goodbye.

Like CU's state funding?

My biggest issue with this entire scenario involves us moving with UT. Replace UT with KU, Utah, *ebraska, whoever, and I'm fine with it. I just don't like playing on an uneven playing field. Anybody who plays with UT plays on an uneven field. Even the SEC schools don't have the kind of money to throw around that UT has.

 

[sackman]

Rational thinking time here... UT won't agree to even revenue sharing in the Big 12. One of two things is going to happen; 1) they agree to it with the Pac 16 (not likely), or 2) they force the Pac 16 to agree to an uneven revenue distribution plan along the same lines as what we currently have in the Big 12. This same revenue distribution plan is what is killing the Big 12.

I just don't see UT agreeing to an even revenue distribution plan. If they do agree to it, I may be convinced, but I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

Us making double what we're making now is irrelevant if our competition is making three times what it's making now. It's all a matter of scale. I think we actually fall farther behind the rest of College Football by making this move.

So... you're not actually opposed to this move, you're just opposed to the state of college athletics in general.

 

[13Buff]

Here's how I'd do it-

Have 4 'pods' or divisions-

USC, UCLA, CAL, Stanford

Washington, Wazzu, OU, Oregon St

Texas, A&M, OU, Okie St

Colorado, Tex Tech (I prefer Utah) , ASU, Zona

Play all 3 every year in your 'pod'
plus play two from each other 'pod' ... one home , one away in a rotating fashion
This would leave 3 OOC games.

Winner of each 'pod' plays for right to Pac 16 Championship Game
highest ranked team hosts lowest ranked ..
example- USC #3, OU #7, Oregon #11, CU #13
USC hosts CU - OU hosts Oregon- winner goes to neutral site for Pac 16 Championship

This would take a change in NCAA rules wouldn't it?

I like the idea even with out a sub division "playoff" if there was a fair tie breaker in place.

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

Rational thinking time here... UT won't agree to even revenue sharing in the Big 12. One of two things is going to happen; 1) they agree to it with the Pac 16 (not likely), or 2) they force the Pac 16 to agree to an uneven revenue distribution plan along the same lines as what we currently have in the Big 12. This same revenue distribution plan is what is killing the Big 12.

I just don't see UT agreeing to an even revenue distribution plan. If they do agree to it, I may be convinced, but I'll believe it when I see it.

I do think UT would go independent before they would agree to even sharing of their precious revenue with anyone.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Is he wrong though? It's a combination of a lack of administrative support and support from boosters, combined with being in a conference that benefits the top two or three programs at the expense of the rest of the members. What could those extra millions yearly do for CU if revenue sharing were equal in the Big 12? It would do quite a bit. CU has tons of potential, but there are a few hurdles to overcome. Being in a conference with Texas and unequal revenue sharing is one of those hurdles

Yes. He's wrong. The reason CU makes twice as much as CSU is because of...Texas.

The Lone Star State is the second most populous in the nation. California is #1. You don't dilute the power and earning potential by shedding Houston, DFW and the other major markets by wishing them away. You kick the SEC's and Big 10's ass by merging those major media markets into a power wielding colossus.

The failure of CU to perform isn't the fault of Texas. That's a home grown problem that must be addressed with solid leadership, which CU hasn't truely enjoyed since the days of Gordon Gee who cared about athletics and Governor Romer, who cared about Education.

If the likes of Oklahoma, Alabama and Ohio can get their **** together, beat UT and be competitive nationally, what the hell is wrong with Colorado? It's like the old saying- You can say "we can", or you can say "we can't". Either way you'll be correct.

Why would anyone look a gift horse in the mouth? Having one of the coveted 16 seats at the table would be better than the alternative. That's for sure.

 

[absinthe]

espn now carrying this.

 

[sackman]

Yes. He's wrong. The reason CU makes twice as much as CSU is because of...Texas.

Oh, well thank the good lord for UT, then. Where would we be without them and their magnanimous generosity? Please sir, may I have some more?

Honestly, what a load of bullsh!t.

 

[buff4bcs1985]

cool sacky is gonna blow a microchip

 

[buff4bcs1985]

espn now carrying this.

where im watching espn and went to espn.com cant find it

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

Yes. He's wrong. The reason CU makes twice as much as CSU is because of...Texas.

The Lone Star State is the second most populous in the nation. California is #1. You don't dilute the power and earning potential by shedding Houston, DFW and the other major markets by wishing them away. You kick the SEC's and Big 10's ass by merging those major media markets into a power wielding colossus.

The failure of CU to perform isn't the fault of Texas. That's a home grown problem that must be addressed with solid leadership, which CU hasn't truely enjoyed since the days of Gordon Gee who cared about athletics and Governor Romer, who cared about Education.

If the likes of Oklahoma, Alabama and Ohio can get their **** together, beat UT and be competitive nationally, what the hell is wrong with Colorado? It's like the old saying- You can say "we can", or you can say "we can't". Either way you'll be correct.

Why would anyone look a gift horse in the mouth? Having one of the coveted 16 seats at the table would be better than the alternative. That's for sure.

:yeahthat:

 

[Deleted member 807]

Oh, well thank the good lord for UT, then. Where would we be without them and their magnanimous generosity? Please sir, may I have some more?

Honestly, what a load of bullsh!t.

Debbie Downer strikes again.

Texas didn't give jack to CU. Both schools mutually agreed to join a BCS conference. That agreement was the tide that lifted up every member of the B12 above the non-BCS programs. That's a fact.

Don't hate Texas for having their collective **** together. Running away from big ideas is not the way to the top.

 

[dio]

You have convinced me Skiddy.... hopefully if this happens there is equal sharing

 

[buff4bcs1985]

so sacky which part of UT possibly coming to the pac10 is hawks fault

 

[HotRack]

Listened to the guy from Orangebloods who broke the story on The "Whorn" down here today. Chip Brown also has a show on the same station in the time slot prior to the show I was listening to. He never mentioned his "sources," but here are some interesting points I picked up from his interview:
1) If the invites are extended - will it be a one-by-one acceptance or an all-or-nothing affair?
2) A&M not keen on going to PAC-X, been talking to SEC, and legislative will is not there to keep UT and A&M together
3) UT REALLY wants to keep Big 12 together (to preserve their chance at own network and unequal revenue sharing, duh) BUT would be willing to give up unequal revenue and network for slice of the potential HUGE pie a PAC-16 presents

I'll look for a link on Austin 104.9 so y'all can hear the interview - this thing is BLOWING UP down here.

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

Listened to the guy from Orangebloods who broke the story on The "Whorn" down here today. Chip Brown also has a show on the same station in the time slot prior to the show I was listening to. He never mentioned his "sources," but here are some interesting points I picked up from his interview:
1) If the invites are extended - will it be a one-by-one acceptance or an all-or-nothing affair?
2) A&M not keen on going to PAC-X, been talking to SEC, and legislative will is not there to keep UT and A&M together
3) UT REALLY wants to keep Big 12 together (to preserve their chance at own network and unequal revenue sharing, duh) BUT would be willing to give up unequal revenue and network for slice of the potential HUGE pie a PAC-16 presents

I'll look for a link on Austin 104.9 so y'all can hear the interview - this thing is BLOWING UP down here.

If it's any consolation Dr. Saturday is pretty confident in these sources:

@DrSaturday: (http://tinyurl.com/397plym) I was assured from w/in Rivals network that Orangeblood's sources are solid. FWIW.

That's tight... Dr. Saturday says it's solid! It's gotta be a done deal! :lol:

 

[HotRack]

Link still isn't posted yet, but here's some food for thought for us...

So, if UT is part of this huge defection that takes half of the B12 to the PAC-16, AND as we all know, UT runs the B12, could we possibly use UT's power to our advantage and get the penalty fee for leaving waived? Seems to me you'd definitely have the 6 headed to the PAC vote in favor along with *ebraska and Mizzery - guess there'd just have to be some arm twisting done to one of the remaining 4 and we could maybe get to the PAC for FREE! :slayer::dance:

 

[superdeluxe]

From the Sporting News:

http://www.sportingnews.com/college...c-10-reportedly-ready-invite-six-big-12-teams

Pac-10 Commissioner Larry Scott did not confirm nor deny the report when reached by radio station Double T 104.3.

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

Link still isn't posted yet, but here's some food for thought for us...

So, if UT is part of this huge defection that takes half of the B12 to the PAC-16, AND as we all know, UT runs the B12, could we possibly use UT's power to our advantage and get the penalty fee for leaving waived? Seems to me you'd definitely have the 6 headed to the PAC vote in favor along with *ebraska and Mizzery - guess there'd just have to be some arm twisting done to one of the remaining 4 and we could maybe get to the PAC for FREE! :slayer::dance:

If the Big XII ceases to exist, would there even be a penalty anyway? Do the fees even hold or does the conference even exist if 80% of it jets? I think you could make enough of a legal case, that if the majority of the schools leave, the conference ceases to exist as an entity, and therefore any previous commitment is non-binding.

 

[JimmyBuff]

Yes. He's wrong. The reason CU makes twice as much as CSU is because of...Texas.

The Lone Star State is the second most populous in the nation. California is #1. You don't dilute the power and earning potential by shedding Houston, DFW and the other major markets by wishing them away. You kick the SEC's and Big 10's ass by merging those major media markets into a power wielding colossus.

The failure of CU to perform isn't the fault of Texas. That's a home grown problem that must be addressed with solid leadership, which CU hasn't truely enjoyed since the days of Gordon Gee who cared about athletics and Governor Romer, who cared about Education.

If the likes of Oklahoma, Alabama and Ohio can get their **** together, beat UT and be competitive nationally, what the hell is wrong with Colorado? It's like the old saying- You can say "we can", or you can say "we can't". Either way you'll be correct.

Why would anyone look a gift horse in the mouth? Having one of the coveted 16 seats at the table would be better than the alternative. That's for sure.

exactly.. I'd say our biggest disadvantage is the lack of enough quality recruits in our state than the power of Texas or OU or any other programs bigger budget or facilities. And that's something that will continue to be a problem since we need to get our players from out of state.. Texas can step right outside of Austin and trip over about 10 quality recruits.. We are lucky to have 10 quality recruits in our own state per year.. That is the biggest issue that hurts CU..

But If CU wanted to put together top flight facilities and compete in football to highest extent we can it would have found a way to get it done.. Until that happens, it really doesn't matter what the Texas's or USC's or hell Missouri is doing.. If CU wants to have a quality program it will put their money where their mouth is.. Until then (and that includes getting rid of this incompetent coach and staff) all this expansions talk, Texas's too much power, USC talk, Pac 16, Big 10, MWC, etc is pretty meaningless to me..

 

[Dark Bohner]

exactly, it is not exactly like we are the prom queen. Thank goodness we are not in the middle of nowhere like ISU or KSU or else we would be talking about our upcoming MWC invite. I really wish CSU was better because it would be cool to have them in the PAC:16 instead of tech.

**** CSU! I hope the coference realignment ends up putting them in the new Division 2 level of football. I would love to see their program left in the dust.

 

[superdeluxe]

Big 12 has canceled their Press conference scheduled for today!

UPDATE, 6:30 p.m. KANSAS CITY — A bizarre day at the Big 12 meetings just unofficially concluded in an elevator. Commissioner Dan Beebe and Texas President Bill Powers abruptly canceled a news conference that was originally scheduled for 5 p.m. and pushed back to 6 p.m. ... then pushed back until Friday.
"There will be no further comments until the conclusion of tomorrow's meetings," Beebe told a crowd of reporters in the pavilion floor of the Intercontinental hotel.
This truly is the Panic on the Plaza.

http://www.columbiatribune.com/webl...010/jun/03/report-pac-10-eyes-half-of-big-12/