Larry Scott: Pac-12 is not done expanding

[GoBuffs08]

if you go to 14, you could pretty much stab the Big XII in the heart by taking either MU/KU or OU/OSU. all that's left is the SWC remains and ISU. while weird, MU/KU are both AAU schools, want desperately away from the current scenario where they are vassal revenue states you have to think, they are "travel partners" and big automatic rivals. KU is a legendary hoops program and have been willing to spend $$$ for football since Mangino and MU is what MU is.....2nd tier hoops and up and down football. gives you KC/STL.

it's not the best "cultural fit" but more of a big play than Boise or UNM imo (which consolidates what you've already got). then, you also have the Big Tex TV's flanked to the north and east and maybe you make a move on OU/OSU if they are truly an inseparable pair to get to 16. of course, KU and KSU did the same song and dance as OU/OSU about staying together. who knows about that? my guess is KU and MU would do it in a second. of course, MU bitching about Texas kind of got this whole thing going in the first place.

i could live without anything to do with Texas or Tech or whoever gets dragged along.

I still think Mizzou is hoping for and invite from Big10 the next round of expansion, although I would not mind at all if they ended up in the PAC. I would like to see a Mizzou/KU expansion over New Mexico and someone else from the MWC.

 

[Tractor]

Air Force brings more to the Pac 12 than csu ever will.

This. Especially for Larry Scott's "worldwide" plan, Air Force has fans/followers all over the world. CSU has fans/followers all over most of Ft. Collins.

You guys have to think big, like our commish. Air Force and New Mexico would jump as soon as we looked at them. We need to aim big FIRST. Use the Mountain west schools to fill in if we don't land all our top schools.

I would accept Air Force and NM, but only as the last 2. I want a splash if we have to expand. I want shock waves when we make our announcement. I want 2 from UT, OU and aTm. That's a natural pair in a fertile recruiting ground. So what if they're "culturally different." It makes it easier to hate them.

Maybe KU/MU if the Texas thing doesn't work or the SEC grabs some of them first. Then however many spaces left we take UNM, Air Force, UH (hopefully not all three).

I don't want to throw around words like never, but we should NEVER take Boise State. They'll never have the infastructure to maintain. Once their coach leaves, they'll dip back into nothingness.

Profit

 

[MtnBuff]

CSU would be a revenue loser for the conference, a long trip for most schools to play before small crowds (in all sports) and add virtually no TV market. Academically they are as good as a number of existing schools so a good fit in that manner.

Boise has limited revenue potential, especially if they go back to not winning and are a terrible fit in culture and academic terms.

I also respect OU and could even deal with OSU as a partner. If you could get Texas in as an equal partner (and not first among equals which they prefer) they would add a lot of revenue, that said I don't trust them as far as I could throw their fat mothers.

KU/MU is somewhat intriguing. Not great revenue potential but would make the conference more geographically broadbased, would add basketball prestige, and might be good culturally. Trouble is getting KU without getting stuck with their ugly little sister KSU.

Overall I would rather stay at 12 but if the world is going to go to 16 team superconferences Larry Scott is the guy to have flying your plane in that storm.

 

[Tatanka™]

Air Force brings more to the Pac 12 than csu ever will.

I agree. Their stadium seats 20,000 more than Hughes. Air Force wouldn't bring a big TV market, but they have much more of a national following than CSU.

 

[Buffsoldier]

contrite UT

Here is where your argument completely fell apart.....

 

[Tatanka™]

Hawaii would be a nice backup plan. It would certainly make for some nice road trips. I think it might make it harder to steal talent from the islands, though. Why leave paradise if you can stay and still play in a BCS conference? On the other hand, we could pitch them on getting a superior education while still playing in front of friends and family a couple of times.

 

[MtnBuff]

I agree. Their stadium seats 20,000 more than Hughes. Air Force wouldn't bring a big TV market, but they have much more of a national following than CSU.

Air Force gives you a huge TV market because of their military affiliation. They get good ratings nationally when on TV. They also tend to draw well on the road, especially anywhere near AF bases and other military installations.

 

[Tatanka™]

Air Force gives you a huge TV market because of their military affiliation. They get good ratings nationally when on TV. They also tend to draw well on the road, especially anywhere near AF bases and other military installations.

That's more or less what I said. No single big city, but lots of eyeballs nationally.

 

[ladyblaise]

I do not like the idea of scrap teams. I would like Ou, aggy, boise and zoomies.

 

[BuffsRising]

I very much hope the new PAC12 isn't expanding any more any time soon. If we expand, we expand to the east, which means we would be in a division with AU, ASU, Utah and whomever we'd be adding. Which means we wouldn't be playing in California very often, which would take away a healthy chunk of what makes this such a great deal for us for recruiting and alumni exposure.

But oh well, at least we aren't Kansas. If the big 12(10) breaks up they are going to be in the MWC or the Sun Belt or something.

 

[Maxer]

I don't think you guys understand the PAC yet. This is not the Big 12 -- the school presidents (and that's who have to approve any additional invites) are snobs. They are NOT going to take schools like New Mexico or San Diego State or Colorado St. They just aren't. Stanford voted down TEXAS in the 90's because of academics.

I know for a fact that last summer some of barely voted to let Scott invite Tech/Okla St, and they only did it because it meant Texas. Without an 800 lb gorilla clearing the way those schools have zero shot of being in the PAC.

And that's even before you get into the negligible media markets they are in. What would be the point of splitting the pie further for schools that bring no value? If the PAC is going to continue to expand, it's going to be for a HUGE school -- Texas or Notre Dame or the like. If some dregs (like Texas Tech) need to be taken to make it work, the presidents will probably hold their noses and do it, but not for anything other than a school that increases the revenue by a HUGE degree.

 

[GoBruinz]

I don't think you guys understand the PAC yet. This is not the Big 12 -- the school presidents (and that's who have to approve any additional invites) are snobs. They are NOT going to take schools like New Mexico or San Diego State or Colorado St. They just aren't. Stanford voted down TEXAS in the 90's because of academics.

I know for a fact that last summer some of barely voted to let Scott invite Tech/Okla St, and they only did it because it meant Texas. Without an 800 lb gorilla clearing the way those schools have zero shot of being in the PAC.

And that's even before you get into the negligible media markets they are in. What would be the point of splitting the pie further for schools that bring no value? If the PAC is going to continue to expand, it's going to be for a HUGE school -- Texas or Notre Dame or the like. If some dregs (like Texas Tech) need to be taken to make it work, the presidents will probably hold their noses and do it, but not for anything other than a school that increases the revenue by a HUGE degree.

Guys, it's this x 1000000.

When Larry Scott says "expansion is still in the Pac 12's future", that is code for "we will expand for Texas plus whomever they want to bring along to equal 16 schools."

That's it. No Boise. No Nevada. No Hawaii for f#$'s sake.

If Texas wants Tech, OU and OSU to come along, fine. My only question mark would be Baylor, because even if UT wanted to bring Baylor (which I'm pretty sure they don't given the events of last summer), there are several schools that would likely veto that option.

But I don't see the Pac expanding beyond 12 unless UT is involved.

 

[ladyblaise]

horns can choke on rocks. dont need them to curse the pac.

 

[PhillyBuff]

Has anyone even considered that Notre Dame could go to the PAC? It would be the reverse Dallas Cowboys move.....

 

[Hugegroove]

I trust Larry Scott. I do not trust UT. I'd be very cautious of any arrangement that includes them.

:yeahthat:

 

[Deleted member 807]

Tech offers nothing of value. If we're going into the state of Texas, go after UH. It's a big school in a big city.

Cougar High?!? Not.

 

[Darth Snow]

Lots of stupid ideas in this thread. Csu? Boise? Texas tech? Osu? We don't need any more people in the PAC 12. Why take anyone at all.

 

[CVilleBuff]

Happy with where we're at personally. This suits CU much better than being in a division with the AZ schools + B12South - those losers in Waco. However, if we're going to 4 or 5 superconferences w/ 16 teams, then the PAC may as well strike first and be at the forefront of it. A PAC stretching across the Pacific, Mountain and Central timezones would definitely present its challenges. I just pray clowns like Texas Tech or Mizzou are not involved.

 

[FlatironsBuff]

Hawaii would be a nice backup plan. It would certainly make for some nice road trips. I think it might make it harder to steal talent from the islands, though. Why leave paradise if you can stay and still play in a BCS conference? On the other hand, we could pitch them on getting a superior education while still playing in front of friends and family a couple of times.

I think whoever said UH meant the University of Houston, not Hawaii.

 

[sackman]

I did mean Houston, but Hawaii isn't a terrible idea. Travel costs would be sickening, and there isn't a travel partner for them like everybody else, so it may be a non-starter. We'd be the only game in town, though. We'd be the exclusive college conference in three time zones.

 

[dio]

I did mean Houston, but Hawaii isn't a terrible idea. Travel costs would be sickening, and there isn't a travel partner for them like everybody else, so it may be a non-starter. We'd be the only game in town, though. We'd be the exclusive college conference in three time zones.

Might also provide a nice gateway to Asia - But I think that the overall travel times and costs would kill it.

 

[Duff Man]

The University of Houston is a non-starter.

 

[Quattro]

Do.Not.Want.Texas.Ever.Again.In.The.Same.Conference.

 

[CVilleBuff]

Do.Not.Want.Texas.Ever.Again.In.The.Same.Conference.

I'm sayin. Their track record in the SWC and Big 12 is proof enough, and now they can't even stop themselves in the Big12(-2). Hope they go indy and stay far far away from CU.

 

[Quattro]

I'm sayin. Their track record in the SWC and Big 12 is proof enough, and now they can't even stop themselves in the Big12(-2). -2Hope they go indy and stay far far away from CU.

Agreed. They're already an independent school in every way except being in the Big 12-2.

 

[The Guest]

I don't think you guys understand the PAC yet. This is not the Big 12 -- the school presidents (and that's who have to approve any additional invites) are snobs. They are NOT going to take schools like New Mexico or San Diego State or Colorado St. They just aren't. Stanford voted down TEXAS in the 90's because of academics.

I know for a fact that last summer some of barely voted to let Scott invite Tech/Okla St, and they only did it because it meant Texas. Without an 800 lb gorilla clearing the way those schools have zero shot of being in the PAC.

And that's even before you get into the negligible media markets they are in. What would be the point of splitting the pie further for schools that bring no value? If the PAC is going to continue to expand, it's going to be for a HUGE school -- Texas or Notre Dame or the like. If some dregs (like Texas Tech) need to be taken to make it work, the presidents will probably hold their noses and do it, but not for anything other than a school that increases the revenue by a HUGE degree.

Guys, it's this x 1000000.

When Larry Scott says "expansion is still in the Pac 12's future", that is code for "we will expand for Texas plus whomever they want to bring along to equal 16 schools."

That's it. No Boise. No Nevada. No Hawaii for f#$'s sake.

If Texas wants Tech, OU and OSU to come along, fine. My only question mark would be Baylor, because even if UT wanted to bring Baylor (which I'm pretty sure they don't given the events of last summer), there are several schools that would likely veto that option.

But I don't see the Pac expanding beyond 12 unless UT is involved.

I've read through a bunch of CU fans' ideas for expansion, somewhat in disbelief. Tech? New Mexico? CSU?

These are not the sort of programs that upgrade a conference's stature.

I get that Texas comes with Texas sized ego and an expectation of Texas sized perks. That's exactly what submarined negotiations with UT at the eleventh hour in the last round of expansion negotiations. BUT...Texas enhances the conference and upgrades its credibility. Like them or not, it can't be denied. I don't think Larry Scott accepts them unless they are in some sort of box and agree to revenue sharing.

I, for one, welcome our new Longhorn overlords.

 

[Quattro]

I, for one, welcome our new Longhorn overlords.

So they can go for the trifecta?

 

[Tatanka™]

My preference would be to stay at 12 teams, but I don't think we'll be there for long. I hate the thought of adding Texas and I'm not too keen on OU, Okie St. and A&M, either. I'd like to see the Buffs in the title game again in my lifetime. It becomes extremely difficult if you add four more teams that are likely to be ranked more often than not. Why not strengthen the conference on the basketball court? I'd love to see Kansas and Missouri. Kansas City and St. Louis are a lot smaller than Dallas and Houston, but they are not insignificant from a ratings perspective. And why not Hawaii? Yeah, they only bring another 1.3 million eyeballs but they are the state's flagship public university so it's not a total academic mismatch. Granted, they don't quite have the academic reputation of some of the other PAC-12 schools, but they're not terrible. And you need a few so-so teams to give you a breather. I'm sure there are a lot of coaches and ADs who wouldn't mind that. I don't think Boise St. has a prayer. They bring recent football success, but not academics, hoops or a big market. So I guess that leaves New Mexico, Air Force or San Diego State for the last slot. I'd go with the Zoomies, but I'm not sure how the presidents would feel about a service academy. (Screw every team in the state of Texas, so no Houston or Tech, either.)

Okay, that's a pretty unlikely scenario, but I can dream! If Texas goes independent and the SEC takes OU, OSU, A&M and Tech (or whichever ACC school they can poach) then something along those lines suddenly becomes plausible. Columbia to Honolulu does make for a long, long trip, though.

 

[CVilleBuff]

Adding Texas would be miserable enough given their track record of asinine demands, I'm really hoping we never see the Whorns again. If OU, aTm and the 7 dwarves aren't good enough for DeLoss & Co then they should just go independent. I hope Maxer is correct in that many Pac-12 presidents simply wouldn't tolerate tier3 (too generous? tier4?) schools like Okie Light or Texas Tech joining the conference. It would be more than a little peculiar for Lubbock and Stoolwater to be "peers" with Berkeley and Palo Alto. At some point doesn't distance have to be a factor? I have a hard time believing that Missouri, 750 miles from the current Pac-12 outpost, Boulder, could be in a conference with UW and Oregon St and everything would function smoothly and coherently. The Pac-12 is the perfect situation for CU, let's enjoy it while it lasts and cross our fingers. I obviously understand that bringing in Texass and Oklahoma would be a huge $$coup$$ for the conf, and a 14 team league is tolerable. However, we all know Tejas coming and demanding the B12 South come along would suck for CU. Being stuck in a Big12 South + the AZ schools would be so ****** compared to the exposure we're currently getting in LA. Besides, even if the Pac was to add 4 teams that we all loved, 16 team superconferences are unnatural as there is little appeal in a format in which you literally play half of your fellow league members at home once a decade. We'd be back to playing on the road in places where we have very few alumni, etc

 

[superdeluxe]

Lots of stupid ideas in this thread. Csu? Boise? Texas tech? Osu? We don't need any more people in the PAC 12. Why take anyone at all.

Money. Which was the reason we took Colorado and Utah in the first round of expansion. If Money wasn't a issue, I don't think the pac-10 goes past 10.
Agreed about all of these thoughts about Hawaii, Boise State, CSU etc etc

The 4 new teams would need to bring in a additional 86 million dollars PER YEAR in tier 1/2 benefits. None of those schools would do that.