(01-29-2018 11:51 AM)ken d Wrote:  IMO, the PAC could not muster the votes to invite a Texhoma 4. At best, I think they could get 6 votes (50%) and would need 9 (75%).

The 4 corners schools would oppose it as a solid bloc because the last thing they want is to be part of the eastern division with OU and UT. Colorado, in particular, ran away from that league and doesn't want to go back.

Washington State and Oregon State, IMO, would also vote no, out of fear that if the Texhoma 4 were added that could create critical mass to vote them out of the conference as "deadweight".

The only solution I can see to ease the fears of these six schools is a fairly radical one. I don't think it has been done anywhere else, but maybe it would work here.

Let's say the current PAC members invite six Big 12 schools: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Kansas. NCAA rules currently require that a conference be divided into equal size divisions to have a CCG. I doubt that the other power conferences would support giving this new 18 team league any waiver from that.

But what they could do, in order to give the "weak six" continued access to scheduling the Cali schools on a regular basis, is to divided them into two "zipper" groups of three schools each and rotate them annually between the Pacific Six and the Texhoma Six divisions. That would give two 9 team divisions each year, who play an 8 game schedule with no crossovers in league play. It provides the opportunity for Washington and Oregon to play their in-state rival every other year OOC when their pod is slotted in the other division. Utah could do the same with Colorado, and Arizona with Arizona State. None of this requires any changes in NCAA rules.

Clearly, the two groups would have to find a way to handle the PACN and BTN. But with each having the opportunity to expand viewership into the other's territory, two currently unprofitable networks might be able to be transformed into one profitable one.

Again, though, there are an awful lot of moving parts to this, and college presidents are hidebound and risk averse. This would be hard to do - probably too hard.

Better plan:

East Pod: UT/TT/OU/OkSU or UT/TT/TCU/UH
South Pod: UA/ASU/CU/UU
North Pod: UO/OrSU/UW/WSU
West Pod: Cal/Stan/UCLA/USC

For two years, the East and North Pods form the Northeast Division and the South and West Pods form the Southwest Division. A school plays its entire division home and away and 2 schools from the opposite* pod home and away.

For the next two years, the East and South Pods form the Southeast Division and the North and West Pods form the Northwest Division. A school plays its entire division home and away and the other 2 schools from the opposite* pod home and away.

This way the CA schools can play each other every year while each non-CA school plays all 4 CA schools home and away within 4 years. And in 4 years, each school in the conference has played every other school at least once at home and once away. No rule change is required for divisions or the CCG.

* = North is opposite of South, East is opposite of West