June 11, 2008

PAC 10 Expansion: Academics, Other Athletics and TV Markets

This thread examines the non football aspects of PAC 10 expansion. The PAC 10 prides itself on its academics, so first we will examine the academic merits of the teams left from the previous discussions.

College rankings, especially those of US news and world reports, have serious flaws, as outlined at here. These flaws hinder a school that provides cheap education to all takers, while providing quality graduates for the workforce. A better measure is the Carnegie Foundation classification and research spending. Research funded by industry suggests which schools the free market chooses for quality research. Research funding data is from the NSF.

The only team that does not field a team that all 10 PAC 10 teams participate in is San Jose St, who is missing a Women’s track and field team. I really planned to talk about each schools prized teams hera, such as Utah's gymnastics team and BYU's Volleyball team, but I am slack.

Together, BYU and Utah saturate the Salt Lake TV market, something no California school, outside of the PAC 10, can boast about their area. Salt Lake City is the biggest market other than the California schools and the BIG 12 teams. BYU also has a national following from its connection with the LDS church.

Academics, other athletics and geography support BYU, Colorado, Hawaii, Texas and Utah as a good expansions for the PAC 10.

Combined with the previous thread, a strong case can be made that the PAC 10 has two reasonable expansion options. Texas and Colorado would bring two historic teams with large TV markets at the cost of the PAC 10 rivalry structure and a greatly expanded geography. BYU and Utah bring two competitive teams, maintain the traditional rivalry structure and keep the geography fairly compact. While Hawaii meets all criteria, they lack a satisfactory partner.

In the end expansion is about the money. From the PAC 10’s perspective Texas and Colorado would be the most profitable choice. The Big 12 has become a significantly stronger conference than the Big 8 or SWC that Texas and Colorado were in the last time PAC 10 expansion was considered. Arizona and ASU were added at that time. Is a change from the Big 12 to the PAC 10, with the greatly increased travel expenses, currently a profitable move for Texas and Colorado? I don’t think that it is, especially when the loss of games with state rivals is considered.

If the BCS is modeled as a cartel, it is in their interest to suppress any threat to their dominance. The MWC is the strongest threat to the BCS cartel. Eliminating Utah and BYU from the MWC would severly reduce the national image of the MWC.

This leaves Utah and BYU as the most likely choice for any PAC 10 expansion discussion. The PAC 10 is in no hurry to expand. About the only thing able to change that would be if Utah and BYU finished the season with a combined one loss, including bowl games. That is a 100 to 1 shot.

Comments:

PAC 10 Expansion: Academics, Other Athletics and TV Markets

This thread examines the non football aspects of PAC 10 expansion. The PAC 10 prides itself on its academics, so first we will examine the academic merits of the teams left from the previous discussions.

College rankings, especially those of US news and world reports, have serious flaws, as outlined at here. These flaws hinder a school that provides cheap education to all takers, while providing quality graduates for the workforce. A better measure is the Carnegie Foundation classification and research spending. Research funded by industry suggests which schools the free market chooses for quality research. Research funding data is from the NSF.

Team	Carnegie Foundation	Total Research Industry Financed	Enrollment
Boise State	Master’s L	7,848 (291) NA	19K
BYU	RU/H	25,973 (215) 2,840 (155)	34K
Colorado	RU/VH	512, 794 (23) 11,491 (61)	28K
Fresno State	Master’s L	NA NA	21K
Hawaii	RU/VH	249,635 (68) 12,540 (50)	50K
SDSU	RU/H	33.275 (192) NA	35K
San Jose St.	Master’s L	34,687 (187) NA	29K
Texas	RU/VH	431,398 (33) 32,637 (17)	50K
Utah	RU/VH	248,168 (70) 8,132 (83)	29K

The only team that does not field a team that all 10 PAC 10 teams participate in is San Jose St, who is missing a Women’s track and field team. I really planned to talk about each schools prized teams hera, such as Utah's gymnastics team and BYU's Volleyball team, but I am slack.

Together, BYU and Utah saturate the Salt Lake TV market, something no California school, outside of the PAC 10, can boast about their area. Salt Lake City is the biggest market other than the California schools and the BIG 12 teams. BYU also has a national following from its connection with the LDS church.

Academics, other athletics and geography support BYU, Colorado, Hawaii, Texas and Utah as a good expansions for the PAC 10.

Combined with the previous thread, a strong case can be made that the PAC 10 has two reasonable expansion options. Texas and Colorado would bring two historic teams with large TV markets at the cost of the PAC 10 rivalry structure and a greatly expanded geography. BYU and Utah bring two competitive teams, maintain the traditional rivalry structure and keep the geography fairly compact. While Hawaii meets all criteria, they lack a satisfactory partner.

In the end expansion is about the money. From the PAC 10’s perspective Texas and Colorado would be the most profitable choice. The Big 12 has become a significantly stronger conference than the Big 8 or SWC that Texas and Colorado were in the last time PAC 10 expansion was considered. Arizona and ASU were added at that time. Is a change from the Big 12 to the PAC 10, with the greatly increased travel expenses, currently a profitable move for Texas and Colorado? I don’t think that it is, especially when the loss of games with state rivals is considered.

If the BCS is modeled as a cartel, it is in their interest to suppress any threat to their dominance. The MWC is the strongest threat to the BCS cartel. Eliminating Utah and BYU from the MWC would severly reduce the national image of the MWC.

This leaves Utah and BYU as the most likely choice for any PAC 10 expansion discussion. The PAC 10 is in no hurry to expand. About the only thing able to change that would be if Utah and BYU finished the season with a combined one loss, including bowl games. That is a 100 to 1 shot.