Pac-10 needs:

Colorado

then either (Hawai'i or Fresno State)

----- Once at 12, it can have a championship game, and if the BCS ever gets off its lazy ass and has a unseeded plus-1 model, the Big Ten vs. Pac-12 can have the Rose Bowl every year.

I'd say the MWC will be looking to expand at that point to try to gain BCS inclusion by taking Boise St., UTEP, and either Fresno St./Hawai'i.

Krocker Krapp Wrote:The Pac-10 is not going to expand. Period. First of all, it requires a unanimous vote, and there is no geographically compatible pair of schools that would fit their model either. Adding teams from Texas, for example, would drive everyone's travel costs up, not down, while MWC and WAC teams do not bring enough money to the table and nearly all of them are academically unattractive to the Pac-10 presidents who would actually have to vote on such a proposal. It simply will not happen no matter how many Sporting News rumor mongers or internet message board posters wish otherwise.

I think that you're wrong about this. The PAC Ten is willing to consider expansion, but only if the school really blows them away. Remember, the PAC-Ten [and the SEC] chased after UT and A&M in the early 90's but they chose the Big 8 instead. The georgraphy isn't that much of a reach anymore; especially when Colorado and Utah aren't exactly within driving distance of California. Even with rising gas prices, the advantages of playing in Texas every year far outweigh the disadvantages of having to get there anyway. Just ask the MWC or WAC.

Texas is one of the biggest states in the US with two of the largest media markets: DFW and Houston. And Texas and Texas A&M have most of the state within thier grasp. The Pac-Ten schools could offer UT and A&M way more in terms of exposure and academic excellence than the current Big 12 schools can. At the very least, UT and A&M have gotta be tired of playing Iowa State and Baylor. You have to think the PAC Ten would atleast consider accepting invtations from two of the biggest media powerhouses in the NCAA. It'd be crazy to not even entertain the idea.

TheLurker Wrote:At the very least, UT and A&M have gotta be tired of playing Iowa State and Baylor. You have to think the PAC Ten would atleast consider accepting invtations from two of the biggest media powerhouses in the NCAA. It'd be crazy to not even entertain the idea.

Could the PAC-10 offer them the revenue shares that they are getting today in the Big 12, where portions of revenue are directed to the schools who get on TV the most.

Krocker Krapp Wrote:The Pac-10 is not going to expand. Period.

1) Do you realize the Pac-10's former name was the Pac-8?

Guess what? They EXPANDED from 8 to 10 teams.

2) Did you know that the Pac-10 for DECADES said they would never have a Conference Basketball Tournament? (Same for Big 10).

Guess what?

Pac-10 and the Big 10 both have Conference Basketball Tournaments today.

Never say never...and the only thing constant in collegiate sports is CHANGE.

TheLurker Wrote:

Krocker Krapp Wrote:The Pac-10 is not going to expand. Period. First of all, it requires a unanimous vote, and there is no geographically compatible pair of schools that would fit their model either. Adding teams from Texas, for example, would drive everyone's travel costs up, not down, while MWC and WAC teams do not bring enough money to the table and nearly all of them are academically unattractive to the Pac-10 presidents who would actually have to vote on such a proposal. It simply will not happen no matter how many Sporting News rumor mongers or internet message board posters wish otherwise.

I think that you're wrong about this. The PAC Ten is willing to consider expansion, but only if the school really blows them away. Remember, the PAC-Ten [and the SEC] chased after UT and A&M in the early 90's but they chose the Big 8 instead. The georgraphy isn't that much of a reach anymore; especially when Colorado and Utah aren't exactly within driving distance of California. Even with rising gas prices, the advantages of playing in Texas every year far outweigh the disadvantages of having to get there anyway. Just ask the MWC or WAC.

Texas is one of the biggest states in the US with two of the largest media markets: DFW and Houston. And Texas and Texas A&M have most of the state within thier grasp. The Pac-Ten schools could offer UT and A&M way more in terms of exposure and academic excellence than the current Big 12 schools can. At the very least, UT and A&M have gotta be tired of playing Iowa State and Baylor. You have to think the PAC Ten would atleast consider accepting invtations from two of the biggest media powerhouses in the NCAA. It'd be crazy to not even entertain the idea.

I think the Pac-10 would take Texas and Colorado if they were truly available (just as any conference would take Notre Dame if they were truly available), but I just think that the chances of any movement by members of the BCS conferences outside of the Big East are extremely slim. Essentially, the Pac-10 would probably need to offer Texas and Colorado (or any other Big 12 school) a financial deal that wouldn't make any sense from the conference's standpoint (not to mention break-up fees and lawsuits that would make the old Big East/ACC disputes look like chump change). At the same time, the value-added for Texas or other Big 12 schools isn't that great - the Big 12 is a stable conference and they're flush with large TV contracts, so there's little financial incentive to make any type of switch. We can argue about whether there are matchups that fans might like better (i.e. the thought of USC and Texas playing every year) or how recruiting areas might differ, but at the end of the day, any BCS school outside of the Big East would need to be completely blown away to the point where it is a 150% no-brainer financially to make a switch (not just to get a couple of marginal advantages).

KnightLight Wrote:

Krocker Krapp Wrote:The Pac-10 is not going to expand. Period.

1) Do you realize the Pac-10's former name was the Pac-8?

Guess what? They EXPANDED from 8 to 10 teams.

2) Did you know that the Pac-10 for DECADES said they would never have a Conference Basketball Tournament? (Same for Big 10).

Guess what?

Pac-10 and the Big 10 both have Conference Basketball Tournaments today.

Never say never...and the only thing constant in collegiate sports is CHANGE.

Of course KL is going to push the pro-expansion point of view because the only way UCF gets into a BCS conf. is if there are expansions, even though there are no signs that the BE/Pac10/whoever are currently exploring expansion. None, whatsoever, from legitimate sources.

BullsFanInTX Wrote:

KnightLight Wrote:

Krocker Krapp Wrote:The Pac-10 is not going to expand. Period.

1) Do you realize the Pac-10's former name was the Pac-8?

Guess what? They EXPANDED from 8 to 10 teams.

2) Did you know that the Pac-10 for DECADES said they would never have a Conference Basketball Tournament? (Same for Big 10).

Guess what?

Pac-10 and the Big 10 both have Conference Basketball Tournaments today.

Never say never...and the only thing constant in collegiate sports is CHANGE.

Of course KL is going to push the pro-expansion point of view because the only way UCF gets into a BCS conf. is if there are expansions, even though there are no signs that the BE/Pac10/whoever are currently exploring expansion. None, whatsoever, from legitimate sources.

KL, although as big of a cheerleader as he is, simply presented two facts there.
You, sir, sure have quite a few posts to go rain on in that case... like every single one on this board.
... and as a pre-emptive strike on any Bulls fan accusing UCF fans of starting expansion threads on this site… please… that's just simply not the case. They're either being started by 1) BE fans; 2) Memphis fans; or 3) Pirates and in a distant 6th or 7th come UCF fans… maybe. I’ve yet to see one here. Our administration doesn’t even ever bring up the issue, our name just happens to pop-up in these threads (probably b/c we just missed the cut last time).
It is funny when Bull posters love to try to put the kibosh on expansion threads b/c they were the last ones through the door.
“Whoa, whoa, hold on, hold on everyone… our weird, lopsided, financially underachieving, hybrid, undermanned for football and ridiculously overmanned for bball conference (which just had their anti-split, pro-bball commissioner just announce his retirement earlier than anticipated) is JUST FINE.”

With Tom Hasen's retirement, gone was one of the BC$ most ardent supporters. This could be just one more small step college football can take towards a full-fledged playoff. It is still signifigant even if said playoff is years away.

We are in 2008. Not 1978. Does anyone see all 10 Pac-10 presidents - which is the requirement - voting for expansion and does anyone see two slam dunk candidates actually available who would make all 10 of those Pac-10 presidents give up the perfect situation that they currently enjoy? That is what I thought. Obsessed stalking time is over.

exactly right krocker. I mentioned the same thing above.. the Pac 10 is required to get a 10-0 vote to expand.. that isn't gonna happen.