<p>Word is that the Pac-10’s making a move to get Colorado and the Big 10’s looking to take Mizzou, Rutgers, Syracuse, or Pitt.</p>
<p>I think the Big 12 and Big East aren’t gonna give those teams up so easily though.</p>
<p>The Big 10 should go after Pitt the hardest because they could renew the Pitt-Penn State Rivalry and Pitt would bring another good basketball team to the Big 10.</p>
<p>Colorado seems like an odd fit for the Pac-10.</p>
<p>Question: If the MWC got Boise State in their conference, would they deserve an automatic bid into the BCS bowls?</p>
<p>I believe so because it would have Air Force, Boise State, BYU, TCU, and Utah, but some disagree because the bottom half of the conference is very weak.</p>
<p>I would LOVE to see Rutgers join the Big Ten to be honest. Since I’m from Jersey and plan on transferring there after doing a year at Purdue. I’d still be a bigger Boilermaker fan than a Scarlet Knights fan though! Boiler Up! I could see Pitt and Mizzou being the top contenders though, in terms of joining the B10.</p>
<p>I think Mizzou would be better for the Big 10 since St. Louis people would start watching Big 10 games. They already have a Pennsylvania team.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe, but they open the denver media market. Also, Colorado is on the short list of schools that have the academic standards the pac-10 will demand.</p>
<p>I would say BYU/Utah would be more likely to be part of a deal, though.</p>
<p>There is zero chance that Boise State will be offered. The academics and non-football athletics aren’t up to what the pac-10 presidents want.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Possibly, but teams from that conference got bids in 2004, 2006, 2008, and twice in 2009 - the BCS would probably argue that no deserving teams were left out in 2005 or 2007, so there wouldn’t be any gain from an automatic bid.</p>
<p>BYU and Boise St won’t join the Pac 10 despite having good football and basketball. They’re not academically similar to any of the Pac 10 schools.</p>
<p>I think the Pac 10 is looking at Utah as well, but probably wants Colorado more.</p>
<p>A built in advantage of inviting BYU/Utah is that it preserves the dual in-state rivalry nature of the conference - you have USC/UCLA, UA/ASU, UW/WSU, Cal/Stanford, etc., BYU/Utah.</p>
<p>jbusc: Don’t you think that performing that well over the past few years would mean they would deserve a bid? Every non-AQ that has made it to a BCS Bowl has had to go undefeated to get there, but that obviously is not the case for schools that come from BCS conferences. Also, non-AQ’s are undefeated in BCS Bowls. Utah from the MWC won in '04 and '08, and Boise State from the WAC won in '06. </p>
<p>Now, I think the MWC in its current form would not deserve a bid unless it could attract another good football team such as Boise State, Nevada, or Fresno State to its conference.</p>
<p>Non-AQ’s are not undefeated in BCS games. Hawaii got killed in 2007.</p>
<p>Where is everyone getting information about possible pac-10 expansion? It seems very hard to believe, and I haven’t seen anything to substantiate it.</p>
<p>Well, it’s debatable. TCU (11-1) got left out in 2005, but that was before they expanded the BCS bowls, and also they lost to SMU (5-6). BYU (10-2) got left out in 2007, but they were 1-2 out of conference including losing to UCLA (6-6), who then they barely beat in their bowl game. </p>
<p>Asking whether the MWC+Boise deserves an automatic bid is similar to asking whether these two teams deserved BCS bids as well, because they would have been the ones who got them.</p>
<p>Whether asking MWC+Boise to go undefeated in order to get a BCS bid is a different question - I would say, since adding Boise State would increase everyone’s strength of schedule, then a one-loss team shouldn’t automatically be excluded, but the bottom of the MWC is still pulling down everyone else.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As with everything most of this is unsubstantiated rumor and gossip, but the fact that the pac-10 is considering expansion came from the pac-10: <a href=“http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/6381/pac-10-will-consider-expansion[/url]”>http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/6381/pac-10-will-consider-expansion</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>dear god no, no one in san diego cares about the aztecs, they’d be even worse in a bcs conference.</p>
<p>there’s a lot of good recruits that come from sd county though, maybe that’s why people are mentioning it?</p>
<p>Whenever the Pac-10 expansion idea has come up, it’s been made clear that Utah and Colorado are the favorites. BYU has academic issues (including academic freedom), and Boise State does too, plus lack of competitive teams in other sports.</p>
<p>One advantage of a school like Utah is that not only has their football program been recently strong, but their basketball tradition is stronger than many Pac-10 teams as well.</p>
<p>Didn’t realize the issues with BYU, that would definitely throw a monkey wrench in the works.</p>
<p>The pac-10 is unlikely to expand just one member, and have to split the revenue to an extra school without balancing the extra revenue from a title game. Thus while Utah would probably come if invited, they would need another school to come with them.</p>
<p>Another issue with a title game is: where would it be? Unlike the SEC and (more or less) the Big-12/ACC/Big-10 there is no natural neutral site to hold it at. The Rose Bowl is an option in a large media market, but would benefit the LA schools, and has it’s own issues on top. Qualcomm stadium would only give the Pac-12 south a boost instead of the LA schools.</p>
<p>Of course, the title game location could be a carrot to whichever pac-10 president is most opposed to expansion - hold it in their city (that’s essentially what happened with the Pac-10 basketball tournament landing at Staples Center)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The offense has the potential to be powerful next year, it’s the defense that is worrisome to me. But overall the team is greatly improving. 5-7 is a great season compared to 0-12 and that 5-7 could have been more with last second losses to ASU, ND, and UCLA. Next year could good.</p>
<p>Sly Si: Sorry about that. I don’t know how I missed that when I was looking up my facts. </p>
<p>Do you think that the Pac-10 would go both Nevada and UNLV? The conference already has many in-state rivalries, and this could be another. I’m not familiar with either schools academics, so I don’t know if they would qualify academically.</p>
<p>They might qualify, but I don’t think so. The reputation isn’t quite there.</p>
<p>Also, Reno and Las Vegas aren’t huge media markets. One of the primary goals of expansion is to gain a new juicy media market for when they renew the pac-10’s TV contracts, otherwise, they’re just splitting the existing revenue with 2 new schools</p>
<p>That is true, but they also would have another high-profile game in a conference championship that would gain interest nationally.</p>
<p>What about Notre Dame in the Pac 10? Seems like it would be a good fit.</p>
<p>Even in the SEC where the title game is a major event, the revenue doesn’t compare with TV contracts/12</p>
<p>Notre Dame would fit academically, but the distance is prohibitive, and there is zero chance Notre Dame gives up its NBC contract and its automatic BCS berth to join the pac-10 or big-10.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It would be cool, but way too expensive to move all the west coast teams to Indiana. Similarly, it must suck to be in conference season if you play for ND. Remember, conferences apply for all sports, not just the profitable ones.</p>