Rumor: Utah Utes to the new PAC-12, along with...
To me the second school listed in this story does not make sense. As we know, Utah, has been a school who has been mentioned in the possible PAC-10 expansion and makes sense regionally for the most part. However, the second school listed in the USA Today has left me scratching my head.
over 2 years ago
ydg2008
39 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I was about to throw this up in a fanpost
with some more detailed analysis and I still might. If we do expand, it has to be with Utah and Colorado, drawing in two major media markets.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
I feel like the whole rivalry thing
is ruined by Utah and Colorado. Just for the sake of uniformity, I’d rather have Utah and BYU.
I agree, this system works well.
But, if it means we get a better television contract, I’m all for it.
GO BRUINS!!!
by moutekicksboute on Feb 9, 2010 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
so it the whole "pacific" thing
but i tend to agree with the folks below, whatever works $$$ =)
Across The Face
BYU Won't Play on Sundays?
It says that they are not offering BYU because they don’t want to play on Sundays? Since when are college football games scheduled on Sundays? Anyone have a clue on what they mean by that?….Am I asking too many questions?
might be for basketball
the pac-10 randomly has a game on Sunday (like ours v. $c this week)
by maccabita4life on Feb 9, 2010 3:12 PM PST up reply actions
OHHHH
Right, right, right. That’s what they meant. For some reason, I was only thinking about football.
Thanks for that!
Isn't that
what we are all thinking about these days? I can’t blame you! LOL!
"The entire world that bleeds blue and gold ... they have been dying for this." - Coach Rick Neuheisel
BYU won't even play in NCAA Tourney on Sunday
They have to send BYU to a Thursday Saturday cite.
More sports to consider than Football and Men's BBall
A number of the non-rev sports do play on Sunday; adding BYU with that caveat would greatly complicate scheduling throughout the conference’s athletic programs.
formerly bruinhoo
byu out because it refuses to play on sundays?
how is that an issue? i can’t remember when a pac10 football game was on sunday and although some bball games are on sunday ucla seems to have sunday games maybe twice a yr. dont think that’d be too much of an issue to schedule around. even the pac10 championship is on a saturday right?
and all the talk of boise st. is silly. yes their football team is very good as of late, but i don’t hear much else from their athletics, although we did take their track and field coach. still colorado is a cool choice and even fresno st or sdsu is better than boise
Across The Face
The issue with BYU not playing on Sundays
goes beyond basketball and football and to the non-revenue sports. Not playing Sundays means more weekday games, which means more missed class time. It also limits the flexibility that TV wants and since any expansion is TV driven, it must be taken into consideration.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
BYU + Utah makes the most sense.
I’m sure they could work something out regarding the Sunday thing.
If they are going to go after Colorado, they should go after Colorado State. The existing rivalries that exist between CU/CSU and BYU/Utah is just too much to pass up.
Personally I prefer adding the Utah schools over the Colorado schools.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Destroys the Symmetry
The beautiful part of the Pac-10 is that it has 5 perfect rivalries, five perfectly matched regional pairs. If we’re going to add, it should either be the Utah schools together or the Colorado schools together.
Still not in favor of it since we’d have to play Pac-10 North v. Pac-10 South Football championship, which we don’t need, and which would ruin the good thing we have now, that every team has to play all the other 9 teams.
Then again, I still hate the Pac-10 BB tourney (useless and superfluous, except for this year), so I’m pretty resistant to change. I think this might have been the only BB opinion I held in common with Lute Olson.
UCLA's most famous athlete: Jackie Robinson
U$C's most famous athlete: OJ Simpson
'Nuff said
Agreed
Not really interested in expansion, especially wrt to Utah schools (talk about boring roadtrips).
Not in favor of Pac-10 BB tourney, not even this year.
If there was any year for Bruin fans to get up for the Pac 10 tourney
It’d be this year…and I’m still not biting. I see no reason why we can’t give our regular season champ (the REAL champion of the league because of the completely fair round robin) the automatic bid.
Yep
During our recent years I thought this tourney was nothing more than a pointless exercise that did more harm than good with potential injury traps. May be this year’s tourney will be “exciting” but I don’t really care much about it. I think Pac-10 should just scrap it all together.
Well the tourney isn't going anywhere
Given that fact, expansion would definitely make it more meaningful.
When you have Arizona, OSU, WSU, and ASU in your conference
You can’t get all snobbish about academics.
If the PAC-10 is so worried about revenue
They should do more to insure parity in football. Any excuse to strike the enemy down.
And I agree, these places, Utah and Colorado, do not have the athletic tradition or the tradition as research institutions. Maybe I’m wrong. BYU is straight out because it is a religious institution. I mean suc was secularized so they don’t count (for much of anything for that matter).
*I* ran over George Tirebiter.
by Bruins102NCAA on Feb 9, 2010 8:43 PM PST up reply actions
Does Colorado have any less of a research/academic tradition than the Arizona/Oregon schools?
I don’t actually know, but if anyone can provide some insight?
formerly bruinhoo
Not sure
Maybe my expectations are too high. I would compare whoever comes in to Stanford, Cal, and UCLA. My only concern is why add more schools that don’t measure up?
I’m curious as to what exactly it is they have to offer?
*I* ran over George Tirebiter.
by Bruins102NCAA on Feb 9, 2010 9:34 PM PST up reply actions
By one of nine measures...
I found a 2008 report on The Top American Research Universities. http://mup.asu.edu/research2008.pdf It compiles measures of nine indicators to create a list. Their composite list does not include overall numerical rankings, so I took the 2006 ranking of institutions by total research expenditures as one indicator. Here are where the current Pac-10 schools stand, with various others thrown in for comparison:
1. Johns Hopkins (by a huge margin – not Pac interest, just surprised me: almost 2x the #2 school)
3. UCLA
(5. UCSF)
6. UW
8. Stanford
(14. UC Davis)
18. Cal
19. Arizona
(25. Yale)
(27. Harvard – yes, I know, the Ivies aren’t always into research)
28. u$c*
64. Colorado State
65. Colorado
67. Utah
82. ASU
84. Wazzu
87. OSU
106. Utah State
151. San Diego St.
165. Oregon
166. UNLV
BYU is not in this top 200, and on the other indicators basically only shows up on annual giving and number of National Merit Scholars.
Arizona suprised me
But I’m a little disappointed with the rest starting with the always disappointing u$c*. I still think Colorado State, Colorado, and Utah all need to come up in that list. After further research, Colorado and Colorado St. might be good, and Utah is worth considering, but BYU? A school controlled by a religion? I don’t want to get into a debate about the implications of this but rather to say I’m somewhat skeptical that would be a good fit for the PAC-X.
*I* ran over George Tirebiter.
by Bruins102NCAA on Feb 10, 2010 1:23 PM PST up reply actions
Check this out: BYU's "Honor Code"
*I* ran over George Tirebiter.
by Bruins102NCAA on Feb 10, 2010 1:29 PM PST up reply actions
Rumor
Fox 71 is against expanding the league.
My reporting of my rumor has as much validity as USA Today’s report of the rumor. Now the story posted elsewhere in which a reporter actually asked a league official about expansion and he said they were exploring it – that story I can believe.
It so happens that the rumor about Fox 71 not wanting the league to expand is true. If we’re going to expand the league, though, let’s really expand it, and get all the schools west of the Mississippi. Think of the revenue we would have, plus the playoffs for football and basketball would take several years and the TV revenue for the 96 round playoff would just about guarantee that all the minor sports would get funded. Road trips would be a little long, maybe a year or so, but we can handle that, because anything that increases revenue is by definition good.
I’m working on legislation now that would require all tattoos not approved by the league marketing office to be covered. Under the new guidelines, a company logo on a basketball starter would range anywhere from $100,000 to $200,000, depending on size and color. UCLA’s new marketing department is thinking of changing the name to the “Be Sure To Watch The Bachelorette This Fall on ABC Court (formerly known as the Nell and John Wooden Court.” They’re looking at positive revenue there, too. Otis Elevator is making a big push to change the name from Janss Steps to Otis Escalator. Big revenue in there, my friends.
And the 18 to 49 year old demographic on campus is too good to pass up. Now every class will have two commercial breaks. That will end funding problems for the university forever.
These rumors have been brought to you commercial free by Fox 71 Enterprises. All who read this are expected to send me your checks for a substantial amount without further delay.
If and when this does happen...
2 years from now, 10 years from now, whenever…
Utah and Colorado are the most logical choices. The research programs are definitely there. The facilities are there. It makes sense as far as market share.
Fresno St., SDSU, and CO St. can’t hold a candle to the academics even ASU and they do not have the post-graduate programs that all other institutions offer. They also lack some of the facilities necessary to compete in a major conference.
CU has sent more astronauts into space than any other institution (18). Utah has a top-notch hospital. I know literally nothing about BYU and their academics but there are plenty of reasons why they wouldn’t be a first choice in an expansion…
I would personally like to hear Air Force in the mix with Colorado. Not that it would likely happen, but it does spare the geographic uniqueness of the conference and would save on travel costs. Air Force fits the “image” of the PAC 10 as far as academics, et al. As well, I am 45 minutes from EITHER Boulder or Colorado Springs and honestly could not imagine if our Bruins came here every other year for football and every year for basketball. If it does go down, BNers are always welcome at the home of Mr. and Mrs. BruininDenver.
Who ever it is
They have to be rivals, just like we have in the Pac-10. It would be weird for two different schools to come in to the Pac-10 and have no rivalry identity. All the teams have rivals…Ucla-sc, Cal-Stanford,Oregon-Oregon state,Arizona-Arizona state,Washington-Washington state. Who would be Utah, Byu, Colorado rivals? I like the expansion idea. Pac-10 has work to keep our rivalry identity.
Rivals
Utah and BYU are rivals. Not sure about Colorado but it’s probably Colorado St.
*I* ran over George Tirebiter.
by Bruins102NCAA on Feb 10, 2010 1:08 PM PST up reply actions
Col rival is CSU
The game is a big deal to CSU lesser to CU but still big.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
