September 15, 2007
Boise State moving to the Mountain West?
Boise State president Bob Kustra has re-confirmed the school's intention to move from the WAC to the Mountain West Conference.
"I've said many times since I've been talking about this in my four years here, the WAC is a good conference for Boise State. Its only drawback as far as I'm concerned is travel and the difficulty of reaching across the nation to play your competitors. And if we could hook up with the Mountain West, which has excellent competition, which has considerable academic quality, it would be a good match for us."
The only question is when? The Mountain West has not considered expansion since adding TCU in 2004, and the presidents of the MWC universities have not pushed to add Boise State.
"Sometime earlier this year or late last year I sent a letter to each of the presidents as an update, telling them about the stadium expansion, how our teams were doing, about our academic progress. I received one letter back, from the president of Brigham Young University. I certainly took that to mean this was not the No. 1 issue that Mountain West presidents were addressing."We will keep them apprised of our efforts. ... We're good enough and we're proud enough of who we are that I don't think we ever should look to anyone viewing us from afar that we're down on bended knee. Boise State doesn't have to do that. If we go to the Mountain West, I want to go because I got a phone call or two from prominent presidents, not because I'm groveling to get in."
Again, no time table for expansion has been set by the Mountain West, but you would have to think that Boise State would be one of the first teams that the MWC calls, if not the first team.
Comments:
Anonymous IV said:
posted on September 15, 2007 2:43 PM — 71.15.112.103 — link — abuse?
In order for the Pac-10 to expand there has to be a unanimous vote from current members. When the Southwest conference broke up the conference that Texas wanted to join first was the Pac-10 since they wanted to be associated with high profile academics. Sadly, Stanford voted against them.
In my opinion the closest schools that would fulfill both the academics, athletics, and the in-state rival that is an anomaly among the Pac-10 would be Texas and Texas A & M. They are both members of the Association of American Universities, split the conference geographically into north and south divisions, give both Texas schools a much larger media market, unify the recruiting of the two most populous states, allow the Texas schools a larger media market, and bring more research and academic prowess to schools in Texas, California, and the University of Washington.
The problems that would be encountered would be travel distance, the creation of conference disparity with a powerhouse southern division (UCLA, USC, Arizona State, Arizona, Texas, & Texas A & M vs. Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, California, & Stanford) and the destruction of the round robin schedule of the current Pac-10.
Bobby said:
posted on September 15, 2007 3:16 PM — 70.112.114.73 — link — abuse?
Oh Lennie of course your gonna be on here arguing against Texas. It has to be a conspiracy against ou doesn't it Lennie. You do not allow anyone on this blog to talk about TX unless it's in a negative light. Get over it Lennie.
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 15, 2007 3:55 PM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
Bobby why do you shut the (You fill in the blank) up. All I was getting at is that academics wise texas is not in the same field as California or Stanford. Oklahoma is neither. If I am not mistaken this is a blog on Boise State. It is just ironic again ut as to be brought up by a ut fan NOT me. So go enjoy the game on ESPN 2 and leave me the (You fill in the blank) alone!
Anonymous IV said:
posted on September 15, 2007 8:50 PM — 71.15.112.103 — link — abuse?
Lennie Collins, my response was just an attempt to clarify that the Pac-10 would not expand based just on geography as you suggested, but that academics would play a much more important role. The only thing that I can assume that you based your assumption on me being a Texas fan is from the following sentence, "Sadly, Stanford voted against them." But I also negated any assumed Texas love by mentioning Texas A & M. Unfortunately your assumption is wrong, I am actually a rather rabid Cal Berkeley fan who was born and raised in northern California.
The point I was making is that the schools that were mentioned, Boise State, Fresno State, and Hawaii while making geographic sense do not make academic or rivalry sense. Also the round robin schedule that the Pac-10 currently engages in would suffer from conference expansion.
I am sorry that you were not able to engage in civil discourse with me.
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 15, 2007 9:00 PM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
Hey Anonymous IV...If I am not mistaken the Pacific 10 does not have no desire to expand at all. BYU and Colorado were rejected years ago so I believe Texas A&M and texas would have been too! I don't want to ENGAGE IN A CIVIL DISCOURSE WITH YOU OL" LAD!
Anonymous IV said:
posted on September 15, 2007 11:23 PM — 71.15.112.103 — link — abuse?
Since you know that BYU and Colorado were denied membership into the Pac-10, I am curious why you would even mention that the Pac-10 should add Boise State and Fresno State when both of those schools do not have the academics to be admitted into the Pac-10 conference? If Colorado, who has been a member of the Association of American Universities since 1966, was not admitted what made you think that Fresno State, which does not grant doctoral degrees, or Boise State, that only grants PhDs in three fields, would be admitted since both are not high caliber research universities? Also both Boise and Fresno are not members of the Association of American Universities
Could you please share where you read that BYU and Colorado attempted to join the Pac-10?
I found the information for Stanford being the one dissenting voice from offering Texas membership into the Pac-10 originally on this site. Here is the link to the full article:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/stories/MYSA081405.3N.SWCbaylor.tech.1ca3e1c.html
The reason that I ask is that you mentioned both of those universities in your initial posting and you then replied in another posting by stating,
“All I was getting at is that academics wise texas is not in the same field as California or Stanford. Oklahoma is neither.”
While that is true, the gap between the four California schools, Washington and the rest of the Pac-10 conference is rather vast. According to the US News and World education rankings the gap between the lowest ranking of the top academic institutions of the Pac-10 and the rest of the conference is #42 and #96. This suggests that the Pac-10 has a huge disparity in academics between both groups. This is a wider disparity than the one found in the SEC between Vanderbilt at #19 and Florida at #49.
But, please excuse me while I defend my position of suggesting in the event of possible future Pac-10 expansion that Texas and Texas A & M should be considered. Both Texas and Texas A & M, while not being on the same academic level as the four California schools and Washington bridge the gap between those five schools and the rest of the Pac-10. According to the US News and World education rankings Texas is ranked at #44 and Texas A & M is ranked at #62. This makes the academic disparity in the Pac-10 less glaring. Both Texas and Texas A & M are members of the Association of American Universities. Texas was admitted in 1929 and Texas A & M 2001. Only in the Big Ten conference are all schools members of the Association of American Universities. Also the Pac-10 is weird in that all rivals are paired by state, (Washington/Washington State, Oregon/Oregon State, Berkeley/Stanford, UCLA/USC). In my opinion, that makes both Texas and Texas A & M attractive since it would continue this pairing anomaly.
I also mentioned the reasons that this would not work. It would destroy the current round robin schedule of the Pac-10. The travel costs and time for all athletic teams would be rather large, and the creation of a potential football disparity between both North and South divisions of the new Pac-12.
I will now attack your positions. If the entire dialogue is about academics why would you even mention Boise and Fresno State in your initial posting and then attack me for suggesting that Texas and Texas A & M are academically a much better fit for the Pac-10? I believe that I gave salient points as why the two Texas schools would and would not be a good fit for the Pac-10. You have given no evidence for your viewpoint. In addition you hamstring yourself by stating that the Pac-10 is not looking to expand. While that may currently be true you commenced this hypothetical situation with your first post. You presented your opinions and I presented mine. The difference being I gave both pros and cons to my opinion. You did not.
I will continue to present my opinions in this moderated forum despite your ineptitude and misrepresentation of the greater University of Oklahoma alumni and fans. I will also assume that you use the anonymity of the Internet to give voice to opinions that you would probably not say face-to-face. If you are this venomous even in face-to-face dialogue with individuals that present informed opinions that are different from yours than you are more deserving of pity instead of disdain.
Big Tide said:
posted on September 15, 2007 11:39 PM — 12.208.88.211 — link — abuse?
I have a good friend that lives in Boise and Sun Valley and get out there every year to visit. Boise State has a solid fan base and is a very progressive minded school. With that said, if I were a school president they would have to lose that blue turf before I could give them my vote.
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 16, 2007 12:13 AM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
Hey Anonymous IV good info but I still believe you are a ut fan being dececptful. If you read my comment I said it would be nice if Boise State and Fresno State would join. The Pacific 10 has no desire to expand. The commisioner of the Pacific 10 was talking about expansion when the NFL was thinking about putting a team in Los Angeles and building a new stadium there. But as we all know that did not happen when Houston was awarded the NFL team. I use my real name and if you were here I would say the same thing to you. You don't see me using an name Anonymous whatever. So you go use your computer and look up this: www.deeznutz.com and get on them! You are trying to sound educated but you are not you snobbish wannabe (You fill in the blank!)
Tomcat said:
posted on September 16, 2007 1:02 AM — 69.148.173.234 — link — abuse?
#10 AnonymousIV Good post very informative thanks for the imput.I also agree with the turf.
Its kinda like playing pool on a table with red felt.While I find that it is very easy for some individuals to be rude and disrespectable on this site.I sincerley appreciate reading posts that are informative and respectful of others in a positive manner.
Congrats to todays winners
Miss St
Bama
Baylor
Iowa St
Kentucky
UtahLennie Collins said:
posted on September 16, 2007 1:09 AM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
Tomcat...Don't try to sound all modest. You are just as rude and disrespectful just like me and others. So go somewhere with that nonsense. Even when OU fans give you info you go off on some rant about fishing and bait. Man you gots to be on something!
Anonymous IV said:
posted on September 16, 2007 1:23 AM — 71.15.112.103 — link — abuse?
That is fine if you believe that I am an uneducated snobbish fan of Texas. If I cannot convince you otherwise I am not going to lose sleep over what you think about me since you are one of many people that have no effect on my life. But it sounds to me that you have an inferiority complex when it comes to Texas. I do not know or care why you feel that way.
Of course I know that currently the Pac-10 is not going to expand. I just gave a list of reasons why and why not Texas and Texas A & M might be a possible addition. I originally thought that Oklahoma and Texas would be a good addition to the Pac-10, but I felt that Texas and Texas A & M would be a much better fit for the reasons that I mentioned.
I regards to using my real name it will not be done since I have had my identification compromised by two different universities. That is why I do not use my real name.
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 16, 2007 1:49 AM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
Well Anonymous IV...you came off attacking me as well as OU Fans. You use big words but it don't impress me. I don't have no inferiority complex when it comes to texas. You must care if you stated it. But anyways... I don't have no problem with you or ut fans since I work at ut and the majority of my friends are ut fans SINCE I live in Austin, Texas. You and I do have something in common. I am not going to lose sleep and my life is going to go on despite what you or people think of me in regards to my sports, political, social, and spiritual views. When the "old" WAC had 16 teams and the original WAC teams mainly BYU was looking into joining another conferences, the Cougars did look into joining the Pacific-10. Of course they were denied and the original WAC teams broke away and formed the Mountain West. Here is a link I found maybe it will give some facts to my statement: www.bruinsnation.com/story/2006/7/2/124640. I liked when Oklahoma played the teams in the now Big 12 North every year. Now that the Big 12 is formed I just got to roll with it. I know that in the future the Pacific-10 is going to expand. It might not be in our lifetime but they will. Which teams...I don't know. I am going to come real. If I am wrong I will apologize. But I am not gone flip flop like a few fans on this blog do. I picked Nebraska to beat USC and I was wrong. I also picked USC to lose to Oregon, Arizona State, and California. I am saying it now so if it does or doesn't happen people want think I am going along with the crowd. Take care and stay real!
Anonymous IV said:
posted on September 16, 2007 2:17 AM — 71.15.112.103 — link — abuse?
How was I attacking OU fans Lennie? None of my posts had anything negative typed about OU. Could you please assist me in finding what information you found that attacked OU fans?
I thank you for providing me with the information in the link. I must agree with you that one of the unfortunate side effects of the creation of the Big 12 is that Nebraska and Oklahoma no longer play each other every year.
I also thank you for picking California to beat USC. I would love nothing more than to see Berkeley go undefeated. But even if they do go undefeated I want them to play in the Rose Bowl instead of the national championship.Thank you once again for the information.
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 16, 2007 2:33 AM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
You were not attacking me or OU fans. I just thought you were trying to sound educated and beliitle me. I again have no problem with you. I again think that the Pacific-10 should expand. Hawaii, Fresno State, Boise State, and even San Jose State could be mentioned. But I probably won't be alive when it happens. After this weekend MY TOP 5 are #1 - Louisiana State, #2 - Southern California, #3 - Florida, #4 - Oklahoma, & #5 - West Virginia. See I give credit...when it's due. Most want to give USC the Trophy but there is still more football to be played.
Clemson Joe said:
posted on September 16, 2007 3:50 AM — 24.168.208.54 — link — abuse?
Hmmm... The Association of American Universities has member schools in Canada. That makes about as much sense to me as any Texas school joining the Pac-10. I was thinking about buying some Pacific oceanfront property in Texas. Oh wait...
My 2 cents: Fresno St. and Hawai'i should join the Pac 10. Can it get more Pacific than Hawai'i?
posted on September 16, 2007 3:14 PM — 69.73.43.23 — link — abuse?Ben Prather
said:
The MWC is not likely to expand until the PAC 10 expands. I think a BYU-Utah expansion by the PAC 10 works well for the PAC 10 for a number of reasons I plan to discuss in February.
The PAC 10 looks content sitting with its current membership until it is the only BCS conference without a Championship game. The Big 10 is the other currently, and is holding out on expansion until Notre Dame decides which conference to join.
Notre Dame is enjoying it's NBC contract, but with seasons like this year one has to think the Notre Dame TV market may begin drying out.
If the Pac 10 does pick up BYU and Utah the MWC would likely pick up Boise State and either Utah State, Nevada or Fresno State. Adding all four plus Hawaii and San Jose would allow the MWC to have a championship of their own.
This much is certain. One day the PAC 10 will expand and the MWC and WAC will feel the pain that the Big East, C-USA and the MAC felt when the ACC expanded.
Anonymous IV said:
posted on September 16, 2007 5:40 PM — 71.15.112.103 — link — abuse?
Clemson Joe you are correct that the Association of American Universities has two Canadian universities listed, McGill and the University of Toronto. Both were admitted in 1926 which is only 26 years after the association was founded. So out of 62 universities only 60 are located in the United States.
cytrixx said:
posted on September 16, 2007 6:29 PM — 74.60.48.112 — link — abuse?
If the PAC 10 expands it will most likely be BYU & Utah as that has already been discussed especially since the PAC 10 schools already play both BYU & Utah in most of they other sports they offer.
Also both schools match up academically as well which is important to the PAC 10.
I believe BYU and Utah are under contract w/ the MWC until 2010
cytrixx said:
posted on September 16, 2007 6:32 PM — 74.60.48.112 — link — abuse?
If the PAC 10 expands it will most likely be BYU & Utah as that has already been discussed especially since the PAC 10 schools already play both BYU & Utah in most of they other sports they offer.
Also both schools match up academically as well which is important to the PAC 10.
I believe BYU and Utah are under contract w/ the MWC until 2010
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 16, 2007 6:47 PM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
It comes do to if the sports programs can bring in money. The Pacific-10 will choose the universitys it believes will bring in the most money and have a great television market. I would not be surprised to see many teams switch conferences here in the near future. The Pacific-10 commissioner wants a conference title game. With Quest Field(Washington), University of Phoenix Stadium(Arizona), and the San Francisco 49ers planning to build a new stadium(California), the sites are ready. But NCAA rules for championship conference title games for football is the conference has to have 12 teams. That is revenue waiting to be raked in! When money is to be made...anything is possible.
Dustin said:
posted on September 16, 2007 9:29 PM — 76.27.57.254 — link — abuse?
That would be awesome if Boise State came into the Mountain West Conference. The conference competes really well and the last two years it has been so close to making major waves in College Football. Last week BYU barely loses to UCLA in a game which momentum was controlled by PAC 10 refs. UNLV barely gets beat in the last few minutes by top ten Wisconsin, TCU falls apart in the very end of the game against Texas and Colorado State loses by one touchdown to California! The year before it was the same story. The MWC is surprisingly competitive. If things would have broke a little different this year the MWC would be better than the ACC, and with Boise State added it would be even better! I like the addition of Boise State and Nevada.
As a cougar fan I would be happy to see Utah and BYU in the PAC 10, and watch them show how well they would compete there, and shut up all the critics who say they can't compete in the PAC 10!! Ridiculous! BYU Spanks Oregon in the Vegas Bowl and Arizona and barely loses to top 15 UCLA and Utah spanks UCLA, is 8-0 against BCS schools at home all time. This happens without the PAC 10 recruits; imagine how much better they'd be with a more equal share of recruits!! It would be exciting to see!Dustin said:
posted on September 16, 2007 9:30 PM — 76.27.57.254 — link — abuse?
That would be awesome if Boise State came into the Mountain West Conference. The conference competes really well and the last two years it has been so close to making major waves in College Football. Last week BYU barely loses to UCLA in a game which momentum was controlled by PAC 10 refs. UNLV barely gets beat in the last few minutes by top ten Wisconsin, TCU falls apart in the very end of the game against Texas and Colorado State loses by one touchdown to California! The year before it was the same story. The MWC is surprisingly competitive. If things would have broke a little different this year the MWC would be better than the ACC, and with Boise State added it would be even better! I like the addition of Boise State and Nevada.
As a cougar fan I would be happy to see Utah and BYU in the PAC 10, and watch them show how well they would compete there, and shut up all the critics who say they can't compete in the PAC 10!! Ridiculous! BYU Spanks Oregon in the Vegas Bowl and Arizona and barely loses to top 15 UCLA and Utah spanks UCLA, is 8-0 against BCS schools at home all time. This happens without the PAC 10 recruits; imagine how much better they'd be with a more equal share of recruits!! It would be exciting to see!Dustin said:
posted on September 16, 2007 9:30 PM — 76.27.57.254 — link — abuse?
That would be awesome if Boise State came into the Mountain West Conference. The conference competes really well and the last two years it has been so close to making major waves in College Football. Last week BYU barely loses to UCLA in a game which momentum was controlled by PAC 10 refs. UNLV barely gets beat in the last few minutes by top ten Wisconsin, TCU falls apart in the very end of the game against Texas and Colorado State loses by one touchdown to California! The year before it was the same story. The MWC is surprisingly competitive. If things would have broke a little different this year the MWC would be better than the ACC, and with Boise State added it would be even better! I like the addition of Boise State and Nevada.
As a cougar fan I would be happy to see Utah and BYU in the PAC 10, and watch them show how well they would compete there, and shut up all the critics who say they can't compete in the PAC 10!! Ridiculous! BYU Spanks Oregon in the Vegas Bowl and Arizona and barely loses to top 15 UCLA and Utah spanks UCLA, is 8-0 against BCS schools at home all time. This happens without the PAC 10 recruits; imagine how much better they'd be with a more equal share of recruits!! It would be exciting to see!Cougar said:
posted on September 17, 2007 12:31 AM — 71.103.168.12 — link — abuse?
BYU and Utah makes the most sense for the Pac 12. Both schools compete well in football, but also have strong athletics programs in all sports. Both schools also travel well. Also, both institutions are highly respected in the academics.
If this happened, the north would be Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, BYU and Utah and the south would be Stanford, California, USC, UCLA, Arizona, and Arizona State.
The concerns here is that the Oregon and Washington schools currently benefit in recruiting from regular trips to Los Angeles when they play USC and UCLA. By creating these divisions, that would lessen their exposure to the LA market.
For BYU and Utah, they would compete well. As stated in an earlier post, their teams would be even better because they would benefit in the recruiting wars as Pac 12 schools rather than Mountain West schools.
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 17, 2007 12:36 AM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
Hey Cougar you brought up a good point...RECRUITING! That's is another reason why ut would not have joined the PACIFIC-10. ut is king most of the time in the Big 12 and I know they would not like to share and compete with USC!
supafan said:
posted on September 17, 2007 12:49 AM — 72.8.97.131 — link — abuse?
So USC has a ridiculous advantage in recruiting. Does anyone think that a change in the composition of the PAC 10 would affect USC's recruiting monopoly? Would a PAC 12 give any kind of help to spreading out recruits more evenly?
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 17, 2007 12:56 AM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?
Hey supafan...although USC has a beautiful campus and is in Los Angeles not every high football in that area or in any of the states of the Pac-10 schools want to go to USC. I live here in Austin, Texas and believe it or not all the high school football players I have talk with most do not want to attend ut! But I would say USC has the advantage. I loved LA when I was stationed in Long Beach in 1988!
tsharbl said:
posted on September 17, 2007 9:06 AM — 61.173.102.141 — link — abuse?
I also agree that the MWC will not invite any more teams until something like the Pac-10 expanding occurs. Some schools like San Diego State have been petitioning for over 2 decades (including upgrading their facilities) to no avail and even Fresno floated the idea during the time the WAC was going through its plan to expand.
The two logical teams that would get invited into a Pac-12 conference would be BYU and Utah due to academics, market demographics, athletic facilities (especially BYU's), and the two schools interstate rivalry. Hawaii has been mentioned but the major things working against them is lack of an intense rivalry (the closest in terms of series length is with Fresno and San Jose) like what exists with the current Pac-10 schools and the other is the issue of travel. Travel subsidies wouldn't be an issue for the Pac-10 (this was a major reason why the Mountain West breakaways did not take Hawaii when they defected; starbulletin.com/2001/02/26/sports/story1.html) but the actual hassles involved with flying would be the main concern.
There is also a possible reason why the Mountain West presidents have not pushed to add Boise State despite a petition. It was probably the intention of some of the breakaway schools to later reinvite Hawaii once things had gotten stabilized financially with the new conference. Most of the coaches (who naturally had no say in what took place) weren't happy about leaving Hawaii behind since strong rivalries had developed. According to this other old article starbulletin.com/2001/04/24/sports/story1.html, it is clear there was too much animosity at the time towards the WAC defectors to allow a reuniting to happen too quickly. Those feelings have since dissipated as administration/personnel changes have taken place at several institutions; the WAC has been regularly scheduling games against MWC teams in all sports for several years now.
The ramifications of a Pac-10 expansion and losing key schools like BYU and Utah to that expansion would be huge for both the Mountain West and the WAC. Lot of what happens will come down to money including which conference has the strongest television deals at the time this all goes down. Right now, the MWC has a terrible television deal which does little for exposure not to mention BCS aspirations compared to the WAC. Many assume that the MWC will be the one expanding but if the WAC happens to be in a stronger position, the tables may be reversed. When you remove BYU and Utah from the picture (doesn't matter if either school has a bad year), the MWC really takes a dive. The WAC is no better in terms of overall team sport quality and has issues with geographic distance but they currently have the better television deal when it comes to exposure not to mention the BCS buzz with what Boise did last year and what Hawaii is striving to attain this year. These are going to be Karl Benson's bargaining chips (if he is still WAC commissioner) against Craig Thompson (if he is still MWC commissioner).
Under a scenario where the MWC expands, they will likely invite Hawaii first. There's the Hawaii exemption rule, the Hawaii Bowl, the old Paniolo trophy series with Wyoming, the connection Hawaii has with Las Vegas (Sam Boyd Stadium is always filled with several thousand Hawaii fans when they play there) not to mention it was an area strongly recruited by the schools. It will also be a symbolic gesture to put the past to pasture and this same courtesy will also extend to Fresno. Boise and Nevada would also be added while the last slot if they wanted to go to 12 members would be a tossup between Utah State, New Mexico State, and San Jose. Utah State would fill the Utah void while San Jose provides access into the Bay Area market. NMSU would be a natural compliment to interstate rival New Mexico. In this scenario, the WAC would be a mess.
Things get messier and sketchier if the WAC finds itself in the stronger position. Re-absorbing all the MWC members wouldn't be feasible since you end up with a huge conference and voting out some current members also wouldn't be kosher (except LaTech since they no longer make sense given the Texas schools that wanted them for regional reasons are no longer part of the conference; this won't happen though since loyalty is something big with Benson after what happened before; so Boise State making this sort of overture may have ramifications of its own in the future given what happened before as this isn't only about football which seems to be the only thing going for Boise at the moment; maybe that success is going too much to their head). Some of the MW schools will also likely turn down any invitation to be part of the WAC again (especially the remaining schools that took part in the initial discussion to defect; this would be Air Force, Colorado State, and Wyoming). New Mexico, SDSU, and UNLV stand the best chance at moving back. In this scenario, the MWC would be a mess.
Whatever happens, the loss of BYU/Utah to the Pac-10 would make the Mountain West look less attractive since that is a loss of two very well rounded schools. it definitely won't be pretty for a few schools in either scenario.
david said:
posted on September 17, 2007 10:03 AM — 24.117.192.115 — link — abuse?
I think BYU's rule of no Sunday play would make it very difficult for them to join the PAC 10. It wouldn't matter so much in football, but many of the other 18 sports are played on Sunday. Basketball is a huge sport played on Sundays. I don't see the PAC 10 changing all of these other sports to different days of the week to appease BYU.
David said:
posted on September 17, 2007 10:06 AM — 24.117.192.115 — link — abuse?
I think BYU's rule of no Sunday play would prevent their entry into the PAC 10. It wouldn't matter so much for football, but many of the other 18 sports are played on Sunday. I don't see the PAC 10 changing all of these games to other days of the week to appease BYU.
Anonymous IV said:
posted on September 17, 2007 7:31 PM — 71.15.112.103 — link — abuse?
One of the biggest problems facing schools in western United States is just the geographic distance. If one looks at this link from wikipedia it assists in seeing the distance between schools found in western United States.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cfdia.PNG
There is larger association that is in place which covers several conferences and divsions that is found in the western United States. But this association is geared toward Olympic sporting events.
Here is the link for those that are interested in reading qbout the Mountatin Pacific Sports Federation.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
Lennie Collins said:
posted on September 15, 2007 12:43 PM — 68.93.134.47 — link — abuse?I would like to see Boise State and Fresno State join the Pacific 10. Then the Pacific 12 could have a championship game.