From: knute@convex.UUCP (Knute Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: New Conference (Best of Big8/SWC)
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:50:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: convex.1992Nov05.195042.13441
Reply-To: knute@convex.UUCP (Knute Christensen)
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Originator: knute@hydra.convex.com
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

= >
= > If this happens, I assume that we would see a two division split along
= >regional lines, putting Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Texas, USC and UCLA into
= >one bracket and Stanford, Cal, the Washington schools and the Oregon
= >schools into the other. 
=

I think it unlikely that Texas will go anywhere (PAC-10 or SEC) without 
A&M. It just doesn't make sense, economically or geographically.

= 
= Sounds pretty reasonable.  Texas is clearly "South", and while Colorado
= isn't, it seems reasonable to group them with Texas, since all of the other
= 10 Pac Ten schools are so well paired off to begin with.
= 
= > If memory serves me correctly (and it probably does not) Stanford objected
= >to such a split when it was proposed for the two texas schools - is there
= >reason to expect them to have changed their minds???
= 
= Yeah.  $$$$.  The Pac Ten is a little afraid that the Big Ten/Pac Ten alliance
= (Rose Bowl, ABC TV package, etc.) may be renegotiated.  The justification for
= this is that with the adition of Penn State and an un-named 12th school, the
= Big Ten would have to split it's revenues into a smaller package.  Hence,
= they would like a bigger share, say 12/22's of the total package.  There is
= really no reason not to expand, if suitable schools can be found.  Stanford
= was the only team not in favor before, and if I understand correctly, their
= reasons were financial--they didn't want to split the conference package
= deal 12 ways rather than 10.  If it looks like a 12 team conference would
= definitely be more attractive, I'd bet they would go for it in a flash.

I understand that another reason why the PAC-10 has not expanded is that
not of the schools can agree on how to split the conference. Essentially,
they ALL want to be in the same division with the two LA schools, as
success in the PAC-10 is measured by how well you do against U$C and UCLA!
Furthermore, for those schools who don't sell out every game, attendance
for the U$C and UCLA games is higher than for other members of the 
conference.

= 
= I can't see a full integration inside of a year, but if they do decide to
= expand, I hope they do it ASAP.  This business with Pepsi State taking about
= half a decade to fully join the Big We Can't Count Conference is ridiculous.
= I also hope the league presidents can agree to change the name appropriately.
= Schools of "Higher Education" indeed.
= 

There are a couple of other schools that have been and/or would like
to be considered for an expanded PAC-10. SDSU has been very overt in
their belief that they *deserve* to be in the PAC-10, and have been
actively soliciting for it. I am not sure how well they fit the PAC-10
mold, but they would bring another large california TV market into
the conference. 

The other school that makes some sense in the PAC-10 is BYU. In fact,
a BYU/Colordo pairing is more logical than Texas/Colorado. BYU does
not currently bring as many TV sets into the conference as some of the
other options. However, the Mormon church is the fastest growing 
religion in the country (one of the few that is growing at all), and
BYU does have somewhat of a national following. I think BYU also fits
in well with the PAC-10 in terms of academic orientation and overall
quality of the athletic program (football, basketball, baseball, track,
volleyball, golf are all "top 20" type programs). As a BYU alumni/fan,
I would love to see BYU in the PAC-10.

Knute Christensen
CONVEX Computer Corp.
knute@convex.com
-- 
this is a test
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college