Maybe as important for the PAC12 Presidents and the schools they represent is a common culture along with geography and the money.
CU was always considered by the PAC as a logical candidate because it fits the culture. AAU membership, highly respected academics and research, a solid fit in terms of campus culture. Outside of athletics a lot of CU researchers are networked with other PAC schools.
We joke about ASU academics but in the B12 they would be in the upper half of the conference. We get frustrated at times because the CU administration is not "all in" on athletic success. In that regard we are like most of the other schools in the conference. The worst scandals in the conference have been USC and UCLA with paying some recruits. The PAC hasn't seen a school sell out for athletic success like we have seen with Baylor, with SMU, go full on JUCO like KjSU.
We may look at schools from a football standpoint but the existing members are more likely looking for schools that fit. That is why they took Utah over a BYU school that sold way more tickets and was a bigger TV name. Utah isn't a church school, isn't an athletic factory, and isn't a glorified JC.
SDSU has a long enough history of cheating that even if they made sense financially they may never be considered, UNLV the same. Boise may not make the cut academically either.
Texas would meet all the qualifications but lack the spirit of cooperation, the sense of balance in university mission. Unfortunately if the horns came calling their financial value would probably overcome any hesitation but if a lot of other schools are waiting for the PAC12 invite they might set their sights another direction.
CU was always considered by the PAC as a logical candidate because it fits the culture. AAU membership, highly respected academics and research, a solid fit in terms of campus culture. Outside of athletics a lot of CU researchers are networked with other PAC schools.
We joke about ASU academics but in the B12 they would be in the upper half of the conference. We get frustrated at times because the CU administration is not "all in" on athletic success. In that regard we are like most of the other schools in the conference. The worst scandals in the conference have been USC and UCLA with paying some recruits. The PAC hasn't seen a school sell out for athletic success like we have seen with Baylor, with SMU, go full on JUCO like KjSU.
We may look at schools from a football standpoint but the existing members are more likely looking for schools that fit. That is why they took Utah over a BYU school that sold way more tickets and was a bigger TV name. Utah isn't a church school, isn't an athletic factory, and isn't a glorified JC.
SDSU has a long enough history of cheating that even if they made sense financially they may never be considered, UNLV the same. Boise may not make the cut academically either.
Texas would meet all the qualifications but lack the spirit of cooperation, the sense of balance in university mission. Unfortunately if the horns came calling their financial value would probably overcome any hesitation but if a lot of other schools are waiting for the PAC12 invite they might set their sights another direction.
