Yes. Its happening. We welcome Oklahoma Texas Oklahoma state ans Texas tech to
the PAC 16. As much as I like the additions I also like the names I don't see.
I would be in favor of a pac-16 if the zipper division system is used. that
way, you would be guaranteed a game in CA and a game in TX/OK every year. Not
bad at all.
I don't like adding the OK and TX schools as the final four to the PAC 16. I
think geography would force the league into an East/West divisional structure
that cut Utah out of some of our SoCal exposure and that is one of our biggest
recruiting grounds. Just my take on it.
If this happens and it probably will BYU is going to find itself outside of
everything football. No chance ever to fight your way into a BCS game because
the four 16 team supers will become the college football play-off that every one
wants. We will forever be banished to the "NIT of
football" and like little orphans stare through the windows at the
luscious treats served to the rest of the BCS world. Yes, we will survive for a
time as an independent with good football played throughout September but in
time we will no longer be able to attract even the best LDS young men to play as
they seek fame on the national stage.Suddenly our fate hangs in the
hands of the Sooners and I fear the land they will grab lies west of Utah in
California and the Pac 16. (We may have won the vast majority of the battles in
every sport against the Utes but it seems we may have lost the war.)I say get on a plane and fly to Big 12 land and make this happen before it is
Rise Up NCAA and take back your game! The BCS and conference re-alignment gurus
have all but eliminated many FBS teams. A playoff is needed which includes all
conferences in the FBS division. Independent teams will be required to align
with a conference. Every league game will count toward the playoff seedings.
BCS opinion polls will no longer matter, as the champion will finally be
determined on the field.
The timing worked out perfectly for Utah if it does happen. If OU and Texas pull
the trigger last year, Utah is left out. As it is, Utah is locked in and whether
the big changes happen or not, they have a great future. Congrats to them.I hope BYU finds a seat at the table somewhere. Independence is viable,
but becomes less-so if super-conferences form. It would be a shame for a team
that has finished regularly in the Top 25 to be left out, but it may well
happen. If I were Holmoe, I'd push hard to keep the Big 12 together with BYU
added...at worst, it implodes and they go back to independence. At best, they
end up on the inside - a much safer place to be. Not sure BYU has the clout to
get it done, but they ought to try...standing pat is a risky option.
As sad as it is for BYU fans, one option that is on the table for the senior
hierarchy that has been without question discussed from time to time is dropping
football at BYU. If this "super-conference" trend reaches fruition
quickly, and BYU is left out, there will be little incentive to continue the
program, and many senior LDS Church leaders without question feel as though if
athletics are continued at BYU it should only be along the lines of what the WCC
offers. Just like at Rick's College 11 years ago as plans were unveiled to
transform it to BYU-Idaho, the football program at BYU will likely be dropped
VERY quickly and without further deliberations.
BYU Joe, As a Utah fan I'm with you, I would like to see BYU land in one of the
super conferences if things go that direction.However, you might
want to reexamine your statement "We may have won the vast majority of the
battles in every sport against the Utes...". Really, every sport? The 2
sports that really matter in college athletics are football & basketball.
Clearly Utah owns the all-time series in football. I believe the all-time
series in hoops goes to BYU by a few games. And while the Utes are down in
b-ball they have nine sweet 16's, four final 4's, 2 national championship
appearances and one national championship. BYU doesn't come close.The truth... BYU has not owned Utah in either sport, nor has Utah owned BYU.
@maddenfalse. we have discussed this ad nauseum and the only ones
who still cling to your belief are the ones who refuse to accept facts as they
are presented. not much we can do to help you if you choose to ignore facts.
No way Texas goes to the Pac, they will not share on equal terms with USC or
Does BYU get the ESPN money if they don't make a superconference?
If the 4 Big 12 teams go to the new Pac 16, BYU could be in trouble. It will
depend on the other conferences jumping on their land grab, but I easily see
that happening. The only mega conference in the west will be the Pac 16.
There will not be a Big 12 as Mizzou and Kansas quickly jump ship. If BYU is
left out of the "64", then it will be more difficult to recruit, more
difficult to schedule, and with that, very possibly less fans. At that point,
the money begins to dry up. I'd say that scenario is at least 50/50 right now,
depending on what Texas wants to do. What we don't know is whether the Horns
want to go west and whether the Pac12 will accept OU and OSU without Texas.
If I were BYU, I'd be talking (begging) to Texas as much as I could.
This week is proabably as good of week as any to speak with them. I believe
BYU has a number of things to sell to the Big12, including immediate access on
BYUtv to 60MM homes. But better move fast.
If expansion happens the Utes won't have a prayer...they'll be in a division vs
Texas AND Oklahoma. This does not bode well for the Utes.And I
really doubt BYU cares much about all this discussion. They'll do just fine.
Has Holmoe ever said HE has reached out to the PAC? Did we even TRY to get into
this party? With Chris B. working for the PAC (talks like she does
anyway), no wonder the Y doesn't stand a chance.
I think it is going to happen, the divisions will get split into East West and
what Utah loses in SoCal recruiting they will gain in Texas recruitment. Going
to Texas every year and going to LA every other year is better than just going
to LA every year.I'm just glad Utah got in when they did, I would
hate to be on the outside looking in right now.
It was the same hysteria last year. OU and UT are not going anywhere, certainly
not out West to the PAC whatever.
Again the best decision byu could make is stay independent and see what happens.
Creating this super conference seems like it may happen. Its already happening
in the South with the SEC. I am not a fan of byu in anyway but they deserve the
opportunity to join one of these conferences if it does occur. Lets say the Big
Ten for example. They could add byu and notre dame and two more teams to make
that another super conference. I dont know what will happpen but any exposure
for the state with any of its school is a good thing.
"as Mizzou and Kansas quickly jump ship. "Probably would
go join Nebraska in the Big 10+2. Kansas State has a good b-ball program so they
might want to jump there too. Not sure who the fourth one to get them to 16
would be... maybe Iowa State. Notre Dame is fine with independence and they're
with the Big East for basketball so I think they stay as they are.
I like the PAC the way it is but as a newcomer, Utah has very little say in the
matter. Happy to belong and will be very competetive. The future is very bright.
BYU will land on their feet just fine. The worst thing that could
happen is that the church drops football. The best thing that could happen is
the BIG 9, 10 whatever, remains in tact and BYU gets an invite and the revenue
and exposure is what BYU wants. What will happen is an unknown to everyone. If nothing happens, BYU stays where they are. Hard to schedule after the
first three weeks but not impossible. I do know the lower revenue producing
schools would love to continue scheduling BYU home games because it makes a
payday for them.
How would a schedule with 16 teams look anyway...Let's see, I assume 2
divisions of 8. Pacific division: (washingtons, oregons), (cal/stanfords,
USC/UCLA)TBD-name division: (Arizonas, utah/colorado), (oklahomas,
texas's)So you could play the 7 others in your division, one from
each of the pairings in the other division and then one out of conference game.
The parenthesis I use to indicate that one of those games out of division will
be road while the other will be home. So Utah could have something like
@washington vsoregon @cal vsUSC one year and then play those same teams the
following year but reverse the home/away, then repeat for the other set of four
schools. It would guarantee a trip to california every year (alternating between
north and south), and the northwest, and it's not like texas isn't a big
recruiting area. I could see this working... in theory. Not sure they'd like to
have only one out of conference game, especially since they have rivalries like
USC-Notre Dame or Utah-BYU which would eliminate the ability to schedule easier
opponents and dramatically reduces odds of a Boise getting big opponents on the
BYU and Utah were instrumental in leaving the WAC and forming the MWC because of
the 16 team conference. A 16 team conference adds too much to the travel costs.
With 12 teams it amounts roughly to 8 1/3% of the revenues. With 16 teams that
drops to 6.25%. That can be a significant amount. SLC BYU Fan and
who are you quoting. Football is one of the two teams that bring significant
notoriety to the Church, so why would they want to drop the program. I want you
to back up your nonsense with facts and names of officials who are talking about
this. This is a daydream of yours. Probably your stake president who is a Utah
fan and thought the Church ought to drop Football.The NCAA can never
gain control of this because the governing board is made up of the Presidents of
the Universities. These Presidents already hi-jacked the NCAA and formed the
BCS. They took 6 conferences, the majority, and rammed their plan down the other
conferences throats. Until the NCAA become an independent body it will be the
tail wagging the dog.
What would you think of a Pac-16 with 4 divisions, North (Washingtons and
Oregons), Coastal (California), Mountain (Arizonas, Utah and Colorado), and
South (Oklahomas and Texas's)? Each team will play every other team from
their own division and every team from one other division on a rotating basis
and then space for 4 non-conference games.Cut the regular season by one
game and form a Pac-16 Tournament? Top team from each division in a two-week
playoff. Semi-finals would be Thanksgiving weekend with the championship game
the same weekend as all other conference championship games.
@SGT_UTEThat was the second option I was thinking of though I'd
tweak something. I think you should play your 3, then one home and one road game
against each of the other 3 divisions. So that'll be 9 games. (example: utah
gets washington stanford and texas at home and oregon state ucla and oklahoma
state on the road).The part where that gets messy is what you noted
with having to set up the mini-tournament which could work but I'm not sure that
the conference wants to go that route (though the plan I outlined earlier
requires 11 conference games and I don't think they want that either). I also
think 12 games is an NCAA requirement so something would have to be done with
your plan for the teams not in the tournament.
if it comes down to super conferences that makes 4 superconferences with 64
teams. aren't there 120 plus teams in division 1 football?so it
isn't just BYU that is left out but boise state and the rest of the mwc, all of
the wac, conference usa, big 12 leftovers, acc/big east leftovers. that's a lot
of football teams on the outside looking in. i know money is the ultimate factor
in these decisions but maybe all the "leftovers" can get some leverage
on the ncaa to finally put an end to the BCS. or maybe not.
Bid XII implosion is here. TAMU joins the SEC tomorrow. OU working out the
deal with the PAC now. UT, TT, OSU, and OU to the PAC16.Mizzou to
the SEC.KU & KSU to the ACC.ISU & Baylor to the
This is all about money, and Texas and Oklahoma have asked for the PAC16 sales
pitch. But if the PAC16 can't convince Texas and Oklahoma that they will get at
least as much money as they are making now, this could end as nothing more than
a bunch of hype like it did last year.
A super conference team will have more competitiion for a BCS bowl bid than a
small BCS conference team but without all the money. For that reason, I don't
like a PAC-16. Texas started this mess with greed. But they are
still a big enough school with a big enough media base to keep their BCS status
in the new alligned Big 12. I don't think they will go to the PAC-12. However,
Kansas and Missouri might join OK and OK State. So, the Big 12 will keep BCS
status with Texas and find new teams to fill their roster that are willing to
take Texas scraps.The PAC-12 got what they wanted in TV revenue and
no longer want a Super Conference. They will strike only after it appears the
SEC is going to sweet sixteen.
So if the Pac-16 forms an eastern and western division, to win the conference,
the Utes would have to go 8-1 (or maybe 7-2) against: ColoradoTexas TechOklahoma StateTexasOklahomaArizonaArizona Statetwo cross-over gamesThen, they would have to
beat the winner of the western division in the championship game.That's not impossible, but in my opinion, it would be a very rare occurrence
for the Utes to put together a team that could pull it off.
@ Chris B | 10:10 a.m. Sept. 6, 2011My, my, my Chris....how quickly
the recent 'have nots' look down the 'we're in the PAC-12 and you're not'
noses.Translation: up until less than a few months ago your Utes
were not in the PAC-12, either. Weren't the Utes supposed to be good sports and
all that nasty "I hate the Utes" stuff from Max Hall was just filthy
@ Mormon Ute | 10:18 a.m. Sept. 6, 2011 Look it this way. The U
would play in Norman or Austin every other yr.To compensate, they
could divide the schedule w/ the originals as such...Yr 1 play USC
& Ore St, Yr 2 play Cal & UW, Yr 3 play UCLA & Oregon, yr 4 play
Wazzu and Stanford then start over again
The 4 'Super Conferences' are the latest, best way for the BCS schools to
solidify their monopoly. I happen to think BYU will get into something if that
happens. But what about San Diego State? What about Air Force, Army, and Navy?
What about Boise State? Why would any fair-minded college football fan (Chris
B, you can stop reading here) want a system that excludes traditional powers as
well as new powerhouses? What about the schools who have almost NO football
tradition or very weak performance? Why is it that we would include Duke or
Vanderbilt or Wake Forrest in the 4 Super conferences? What about UCONN (or
most of the Big East for that matter?) Even CSU and Wyoming have had more
success that a lot of the Big East schools. Why not 8 'Super Conferences'?
THAT starts to look more like a tourney! Anyone disagree? Don't kill
re: manutdI think when they form the 4 16-team leagues the point
would be then to get out of the NCAA and create their own association. One that
doesn't include some of the absolutely absurd rules that the NCAA has.The NCAA has a rule now, where the school can only provide student-athletes
with fruits, nuts, and bagels. Providing butter, jelly, or cream cheese is a
minor violation. This is a current rule in the NCAA. Look this up on google
news, I would post a link, but they don't allow link postings.I hope
they get 4 16-team conferences soon, and the super conferences say goodbye to
Utah fans, gleeful that Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State might
join the PAC 12, should consider what their chances might be of ever winning a
conference title and playing in a national championship game or another BCS
bowl, for that matter. Utah's recent "flash in the pan" in football
may seem tothe clueless a dynasty, but faced with playing and defeating Texas,
Oklahoma, USC, Oregon, Washington, Stanford and the other ten schools in the
PAC16 year in and year out would be daunting. Utah will sooner or later become
the dregs of the PAC12(maybe even this year). How faithful will the Ute faithful
In addition: Is there a reason why Indiana Football should beat out Boise State
or AFA? Is there a reason Northwestern should be a part of a 'super conference'
and Fresno State gets left in the cold? Why would you want a Kansas in a 'super
conference' (I get basketball) but not have a Nevada? The list goes on. This
would be a BAD thing for college football unless there are more than 4 of these
conferences. And Utah fans, adding OU and Texas to your schedule virtually
guarantees that you out of the loop most years. All this does is either keeps
the 'upstarts' like Boise State, TCU, Utah, and BYU either out of the picture,
or in Utah's case fat and happy with money but no serious chance of winning a
NC. (Really, you've done well at times, but you are not going to beat OU and
Texas in recruiting.) I'm with LaVell Edwards on this. It ruins regional
rivalries and it excludes a lot of teams who don't deserve to go the way of the
gchris, that flash in the pan Utah team as you describe it has a better overall
winning percentage, a far better bowl record, and is up on your mid major team
by 20 games. If going undefeated twice in the space of four years isn't
impressive BYU's doing once back when a cassette Walkman was the cutting edge
technology must be really lame? Keep hoping Utah will be the dregs of the PAC12
and get ready to be disappointed.
If the super conference garbage goes through, all the teams left on the outside
need to file an antitrust lawsuit. Get serious about it. Stop talking and do
it.I don't see how any court with any ethics at all could side with
Re:Keisels Beard If their are 4 super conferences and the teams in
those conferences agree to leave the NCAA and create a different association,
what could those left out legally do?Can a CFL team sue the NFL for
not letting them in their league?NCAA could still have their
champion, but the new association would just have its own playoff, and not have
some of the stupid rules that the NCAA has.
No way these schools are going??? UMM this the 2nd time they are discussing it
and it will happen not will but when.
@ pebblesFor crying out loud, please tell me how you compare two
undefeated seasons in the MWC cupcake league to a theoretical winning run in the
PAC 14.2Let me start a list of words that somehow come close to
defining this type of thinking. I'll let others chime in. Let's start with...Laughable
It is very doubtful that the 12 in the PAC want Texas and Okla to join up. They
may care as much about Tech and OKState. The problem, even a more difficult
road to a championship and big glory games. The SLC crowd is already bemoaning
the current schedule in football and Bball. Think how tough it would be with
the new guys added.There are also TV money issues with T and O that
the PAC does not want to deal with. If they decided to make Utah but not Colo
wait 2 years plus for money, they are not going to want to share with two teams
who already has more than anyone else.
This is not a hate comment. Just stating a fact. I was there in 2004 cheering
my head off Tempe but I fully understood that if Utah had played BYU's schedule
that year, they would not have been undefeated. No USC, no ND in South Bend.
Hardest game, Texas A&M, middle road big 12 that year. BYU even with it's
"weaker than Utah team", could have beaten Pitt in that game in Tempe.
So could have a couple other MWC teams.My point, not to degrade a
wonderful, magic, year, but to point out how scheduling everyting. The PAC12
doesn't want to make scheduling impossible. Larry Scott may dream of glory, but
not the guys in the trenches.
sammy,BYU has never played a cupcake schedule quite like Utah's
2008... beating two top 6 teams and four top 25 teams. Even Utah's 2004 squad
beat a top 25 team. BYU isn't exactly the poster child for beating ranked teams
and making it to BCS bowls. You do know that prior to Utah's inclusion in the
PAC 12, they had more wins against BCS schools that any other non-AQ team right.
But by all means keep spouting off with no facts to back it up.
Alternate,***This is not a hate comment. Just stating a fact... but
I fully understood that if Utah had played BYU's schedule that year, they would
not have been undefeated***Actually, that's not fact but an opinion.
I fail to see any games on BYU's schedule that Utah would have lost to... maybe
USC, but that is debatable. But since the 2 teams never played, we'll never know
who would have won. Really, your comment isn't really about the
article. Yes, the PAC16 happen soon. The money issues that the WAC had with 16
teams won't be an issue for PAC16. The money issue with Oklahoma and Texas isn't
an issue but a reason for them to join the conference. Oklahoma is upset that
Washington St. is going to make more TV revenue than they are. That is one
reason they want to change. Larry Scott has a clause to expand the TV deal
should the conference expand. So, no lost revenue for PAC12 teams. I personally
don't want the change to happen, but it looks certain to happen.