Constant change marks news of college conference realignments

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • rvalens2
    June 16, 2010 12:07 p.m.

    (cont. from previous post)

    3. CULTURAL FIT: The Pac-10 requires unanimous votes to enact new policies. The church leadership [of which I am a member] has in it's recent and distant past been guilty of exercising their own brand of bigotry [getting involved in California's Prop 8, discrimination against Blacks, patriarchal misogyny,...]. And since ybU receives their marching orders from the church, it seems pretty reasonable to me for them to want to block out a maverick school who would likely tarnish their image with continued behavior not consistent with academia. This is the same school that blocked a Rodin exhibit because a nude sculpture was determined too purient. The Pac-10 doesn't hate Mormons. They hate ybU and it's repressive leadership. Utah is a secular school who is not beholden to the General Authorities. Edge: Utah. THERE's a couple MORE reasons why ybU will not be considered for expansion. They fell behind the Utes in all three arenas. All things considered, Utah was/(is) the far better choice.

    GO UTES!!!

  • rvalens2
    June 16, 2010 12:06 p.m.

    Re: bostonblue

    It isn't all about bigotry, read the following posted by Naval Vet. 3 reasons why the PAC-10 prefers Utah over BYU.

    1. ACADEMIC FIT. Utah is a Tier 1 Research institution [the Medical school is an added bonus], and one who has NOT been censored by the AAUP. ybU is NOT a Research school, and HAS been academically censored. Edge: Utah.

    2. ATHLETIC FIT: Utah has 2 BCS bowl trophies in the last 6 years, has the most wins over teams from AQ conferences than any other non-AQ school, and is amid a 9-game postseason win streak. The tdS hasn't been to a meaningful bowl game since 1996, is ranked behind Utah, TCU, and Navy [tied with Fresno St.] in wins over BCS school competition, and has won only 4 of their last 9 postseason games. Edge: Utah.


  • bostonblue
    June 16, 2010 12:57 a.m.

    Utah will go PAC. The big question: why? The reason(s) for expansion: MONEY? Add athletics, and even academics. A BIGGER WHY??

    BYU will always bring more MONEY than Utah! BYU has filled its 65,000 capacity most of the last 30 years. Utah has trouble filling its recently expanded 45,000--unless playing BYU! At UCLA, 40% of the fans were BYU fans. Same thing at Washington. In PAC country, that will always be the case. That won't happen EVER with Utah, let alone every game!

    Utah Football was non-existent until Urban and a BYU PLAYER decided to coach there. Still, BYU controls the last 5 years!

    Same TV market? Are you kidding?! BYU will always pull more viewers even in Utah. But, BYU has 7 Million North American Mormons! The BYU potential TV audience is one of the nation's largest. Utah will NEVER compete with MONEY.

    BYU: 30 years of a nationally recognized program, national championship, heisman, NFL MVPs, better facilities. Director's Cup #26.

    Utah: Women's gymnastics, and a few years of football. Director's Cup #57.

    BYU undergrad, Business, Law superior.

    So WHY??

    PAC Bigotry. PERIOD.

  • diggs76
    June 15, 2010 3:38 p.m.

    Alright here is an an idea...just an idea I say, but the question is, why hasn't the pac-10 contacted Utah? With news of the Big 12 staying at 10 teams there is further news that they may petition the NCAA to change the "old time" rule of 12 teams for a championship game. Could the Pac-10 be waiting to add Utah just in case the NCAA changes the rule. If they don't need twelve, why add Utah. Less schools, more money for each school. Just a thought......

  • hedgehog
    June 15, 2010 2:18 p.m.

    "So where did all the money suddenly come from to keep the Big 12 together? Why wasn't the money there before?"


    There is a lot of good ‘ol boys down in Texas who are putting a bunch of new money into the Big 12 (10) kitty. The see a revenue bonanza by having a Texas TV deal.

  • BYU Student
    June 15, 2010 11:54 a.m.

    I think you're taking the word "literal" too literally. Words are used how they're used, and that changes over time. Beebe saved the current situation of college football by sticking it to the Pac-10 (well, I guess Texas stuck it to the Pac-10) and keeping status quo. What a feat. College football may be corrupt and full of issues at this moment, but I'd rather stay in the frying pan and not jump into the fire of super conferences. We'll see how the next few years play out. In the mean time, we all oughta send thank you notes to Beebe for keeping the Big 12 minus 2 together for the time being.

  • Fubecao
    June 15, 2010 10:42 a.m.

    From the story: "He literally lifted up a dead league and gave it life."

    You mean Beebe actually bent over, reached down to the floor with his hands where the Big 12 Conference was sitting, and used his muscles to pick it up, and then miraculously bestowed it with vital force?? Were there actual witnesses to this unsual event? Who was your source?

    Let's all band together to stop the misuse of the word "literally." You'd think edited newspaper stories would get it right.

  • Scott1
    June 15, 2010 1:32 a.m.

    So where did all the money suddenly come from to keep the Big 12 together? Why wasn't the money there before?

  • Bugoff
    June 14, 2010 11:38 p.m.

    For there to be super teams there must also be enablers. UT-Austin and OU-Norman fight it out most years but they have to have OSU, TT and A&M and other teams to be good but not good enough. Every conference has some weak and mediocre teams that benefit from being in the conference but are really enablers of the elites.

    Realignment was based mostly on TV revenues. The Big 12 North is mostly plains and not big TV audiences.

    Texas can now have the best of both worlds. They are like ND but also have a conference full of enablers to prop up their dynasty. OU, TT and A&M might beat them once in a while but not often enough to really lose them any revenue.

    It may take some time but teams with strong enough TV demand will go the route of Texas. The rules on coverage will be rewritten in favor of the haves at the expense of the conferences.

    The MTN Conference TV contract is way out of date.