Wonder if the Pac 12 essentially telling OU no when they wanted to join a couple of years back will bite the conference in the butt.
That was a dumb move. I understand that Okie Lite brings no value addition if you're already getting OU except for increasing the volume of games and that they also have an academic reputation with which no existing member wanted affiliation... but it would have put the Pac-14 in a much more powerful position. Of course, there's also a lot out there that says OU/OSU weren't committed to joining the Pac but were only shopping for an offer that would give them more leverage within the Big 12. So, I can also see why it was easy for the Pac-12 presidents to vote "no" based on not wanting to get used & rejected when they were on the fence about making those additions even if they'd been sure to join.
A question that's actually a little more interesting to me: if Boise State and BYU are seen as so valuable by other conferences (and SDSU, too, but just way too far away), why do we think this can never happen for Pac-12 expansion?
I realize we are talking about markets, but in terms of what matters within the footprint the Pac-12 doesn't quite own its markets.
It's hard for me to accept that SDSU + Boise State doesn't make the Pac-12 stronger. No one's going to 16 yet, so that would be a simple add. Even at a smaller piece of the pie, they'd make more than in the MWC. I know there are the issues with SDSU on the Cal State vs the UC system. There's also the issue of their football stadium if Qualcomm goes away. And the market being pretty much a Pac market already. With Boise State, I know there are the issues with market size and academics.
I believe that both of these schools are answering the main questions. SDSU expanding with a west campus in Mission Valley with plans for a new football stadium there. Boise State is about to complete a 5-year strategic plan that focused on very much improving its academic profile, adding new doctoral programs and cutting its associate's degrees. Both areas are growing like crazy. The last thing the Pac-12 needs is those schools in the Big 12. I think they hurt the conference enough as it is by diluting the conference's national reputation as THE conference for the west. Hell, if we asked sports fans in the east what the main programs are in the west, a lot of people would name Boise State and SDSU ahead of some Pac-12 schools (along with BYU and UNLV).
In my heart, I really want a western conference and to leave no doubt or openings to the market. And while I don't think it's the most lucrative short-term plan (far from it), I do believe that long-term it would be the way to go. These states and metros are growing.
I look at the following, and I just don't see what's wrong with the idea of doing what it takes to absolutely own a footprint that includes CA, NM, AZ, UT, ID, NV, CA, OR and WA (the following was created from a middle projection scenario from
THIS REPORT):
Maybe we should stop worrying so much about what everyone else is doing, be true to the Pac DNA*, and make this conference as strong as it can be while being true to itself. The Pac is not the farm belt. The Pac is not Texas. It is the Mountain and Pacific zones of the United States. Own it. Make it awesome.
(*When I see a successful businesses fail as they mature and grow, the main mistake seems to be that they drift away from their DNA. Focus is a good thing for the health of an organization.)