Local money can come up with the funds for a 3-year commitment to pay for a NC game in Missoula. It was only three parties that chose to provide the funds and one year was intentional. It was more of a point than a bid. The point was to get the game out of Chattanooga. If Missoula resources wanted to do it for 3 years it would have happened.David2 said:
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Utah to PAC 10
- Thread starter bobaloo
- Start date
billings_poke
Well-known member
I keep hearing Utah and Colorado will get the invites to the PAC 10 if it expands. Colorado turned the PAC 10 down a few years ago though. BYU does not fit the academic profile due to no real graduate programs and Boise is a non starter and would not even have a wild chance for the PAC 10. CSU is a maybe though.
If CU goes PAC 10 then BYU has a shot at the BIG 12 but TCU will not get a look from the Big 12 due to its location. The Big 12 already owns the Dallas market and TCU adds nothing to them for TV revenue, which this round of expansions is all about.
IF and it is a big if, it happens then MWC will add Boise, Fresno, and UNR at least and maybe two more to go to 12. to replace BYU and Utah.
The WAC will be in real trouble to survive and a raid on the Big Sky will follow.
OR Nothing happens which is a possibility as well
12 team MWC
TCU
CSU
Air Force
Wyo
New Mexico
sdsu
Unlv
Boise
Fresno
UNR
San Jose St
Hawaii or Utah State ( could Montana take the Hawaii/Utah state slot hmm? maybe)
Left Out and in trouble
Hawaii (Utah State)
New Mexico St
Idaho
La Tech
If CU goes PAC 10 then BYU has a shot at the BIG 12 but TCU will not get a look from the Big 12 due to its location. The Big 12 already owns the Dallas market and TCU adds nothing to them for TV revenue, which this round of expansions is all about.
IF and it is a big if, it happens then MWC will add Boise, Fresno, and UNR at least and maybe two more to go to 12. to replace BYU and Utah.
The WAC will be in real trouble to survive and a raid on the Big Sky will follow.
OR Nothing happens which is a possibility as well
12 team MWC
TCU
CSU
Air Force
Wyo
New Mexico
sdsu
Unlv
Boise
Fresno
UNR
San Jose St
Hawaii or Utah State ( could Montana take the Hawaii/Utah state slot hmm? maybe)
Left Out and in trouble
Hawaii (Utah State)
New Mexico St
Idaho
La Tech
GrizMontana said:
What traditional rivaries? Texas played Oklahoma when they were in different conferences, no reason it wouldn't continue.
Pac 10 will only expand if it makes financial sense. Texas and Texas A&M would for the Pac 10. Remains to be seen if leaving the Big 12 benefits them.
granitegriz
Well-known member
BYU has real graduate programs...what are you talking about poke?
billings_poke
Well-known member
granitegriz said:
BYU focuses on an undergraduate education and are quite good at that. Compared to the PAC - 10 their Graduate programs are few and far between. We are talking PHD programs here. There is no comparison.
There's more to the Pac 10 study.
The Pac 10 has a new commissioner who came from the Women's Tennis Association or something like that. He has hired the former Big 10 commissioner as his deputy -- and that guy is the guy who put together the Big 10 network.
The new Pac 10 commissioner also wants to explore/possibly pursue a Pac 10 network, and his new deputy is the guy on that assignment. Big 10 net had fewer than 20 million homes in its first year; the second year it had 75 million homes.
So it's more than just possibly adding two schools. Think about adding Air Force, as well as Utah, or perhaps Colorado. Air Force would have "sidewalk" alums just as Notre Dame has had.
The Pac 10 has a new commissioner who came from the Women's Tennis Association or something like that. He has hired the former Big 10 commissioner as his deputy -- and that guy is the guy who put together the Big 10 network.
The new Pac 10 commissioner also wants to explore/possibly pursue a Pac 10 network, and his new deputy is the guy on that assignment. Big 10 net had fewer than 20 million homes in its first year; the second year it had 75 million homes.
So it's more than just possibly adding two schools. Think about adding Air Force, as well as Utah, or perhaps Colorado. Air Force would have "sidewalk" alums just as Notre Dame has had.
SouthDakotaGrizzly
Well-known member
billings_poke said:
I'm not saying that academics isn't an issue, but I don't exactly understand why it is. Last I checked, the purpose of the conference is for athletic affiliations. How many USC or Oregon or even Stanford (who I would call the elite academic school in the conference) football players are going on to get their PhD's? Yeah, sometimes football players (and other athletes) end up in grad school but often it's because they redshirted and have an extra year of eligibility and need to take some credits.
The question is, would there be a Pac-10 if athletics weren't involved? No. Therefore, the decision on who is allowed to join the Pac-10 should be based on athletic qualifications, not academic ones.:mytwocents:
SouthDakotaGrizzly said:
I'm not saying that academics isn't an issue, but I don't exactly understand why it is. Last I checked, the purpose of the conference is for athletic affiliations. How many USC or Oregon or even Stanford (who I would call the elite academic school in the conference) football players are going on to get their PhD's? Yeah, sometimes football players (and other athletes) end up in grad school but often it's because they redshirted and have an extra year of eligibility and need to take some credits.
The question is, would there be a Pac-10 if athletics weren't involved? No. Therefore, the decision on who is allowed to join the Pac-10 should be based on athletic qualifications, not academic ones.:mytwocents:[/quote]
You are not thinking like a University President.
The Big 10, first and foremost, is an academic alliance. That is why the Notre Dame faculty would give anything to be in it - best research consortium in the world.
The Pac 10 Presidents will not allow anyone to be associated with their universities unless they are on more or less equal academic footing - and to them, that means top RESEARCH/PHD universities.
SouthDakotaGrizzly
Well-known member
dbackjon said:
You're right, I'm thinking like an average sports fan, who views the conferences as athletic affiliations. I don't give a damn if Ohio St. and Michigan are working together on some cutting edge research, but I sure as hell will watch them play football! :thumb:
billings_poke
Well-known member
Athletic conferences work best when all the members are similar institutions with similar goals for academics and athletics. Similar schools face the same type of funding and admittance issues and want to be seen as a peer to other members in all areas. Very different schools will have different agendas for athletics and academics and that can cause friction in the conference. There is much more to this than a football team and all the schools know it.
Listen to Griz members complain that UM does not belong with the directional schools it is now paired with in the big sky. Very different budgets and issues for these schools and the commitment to athletics is very different between schools. This is what the AQ conferences want to avoid.
Boise would stick out academically like a sore thumb in the PAC 10. Plus they play in a small TV market that would not help the PAC-10 increase revenue. Utah fits
Listen to Griz members complain that UM does not belong with the directional schools it is now paired with in the big sky. Very different budgets and issues for these schools and the commitment to athletics is very different between schools. This is what the AQ conferences want to avoid.
Boise would stick out academically like a sore thumb in the PAC 10. Plus they play in a small TV market that would not help the PAC-10 increase revenue. Utah fits
Utah for sure, the talk around Reno is what is going to happen to the WAC when the Mountain West takes Boise and Fresno.
djollieballs
Well-known member
Looks like UM will miss the boat again. Now the Griz' only option for similar competition will be a VERY watered-down WAC that will be a pseudo FBS conference with pretty much no BCS bowl revenue sharing and no television money. For these two reasons, all financial incentive to move up will cease to exist.
I look at the budget "crisis" at UM and all I think is: "if UM is having problems, how bad are the problems at EWU, NAU, UNC, SAC, PSU, and ISU?" The Big Sky will not exist in 5 years, not in it's current state anyway. I bet it turns into a BB league with all of the above schools dropping football.
The Cali schools are going to have their athletic departments gutted, so there goes any hope of Poly or Davis replacing the schools that will be forced to drop football. The EWU red turf sideshow reeks of desperation and after it fails to attract more fans and support we can pretty much count on their program going the way of Western Washington. NAU has been rumored to be in massive financial upheaval for about two years now, so we'll see how long they last. Weber gets zero fan support for FB, so I imagine they will be hard pressed to justify a very expensive sport. UNC has only won 2 or 3 games since joining the BSC so I don't see them justifying keeping FB.
The move down crowd will get their wettest dream fulfilled when UM is forced to move to D-2 because THERE WON'T BE ANYONE LEFT IN THE WEST TO PLAY AGAINST AT THE FCS LEVEL.
But the bright side is, the Griz will still get to play in the playoffs every year and as an added bonus we'll be in the same conference as those Western State and Ft Lewis teams PR and the rest of the Move Down crew loves watching so much. The Griz will also get to beat up on powerhouse GVSU. Unfortunately tickets will still be $50 for homecoming and Griz/Cat because you dumb schmucks don't understand what quality competition is or why we thought it mattered.
After about three seasons of being in D-2 the fans will quit showing up entirely and UM will go the way of University of Vermont (which is the east coast version of UM) and will drop football entirely.
But hey, at least we'll never have to hear GB and PR screaming bloody murder about paying for extra scholarships and Title 9 ever again. That alone will be worth it for me.
I look at the budget "crisis" at UM and all I think is: "if UM is having problems, how bad are the problems at EWU, NAU, UNC, SAC, PSU, and ISU?" The Big Sky will not exist in 5 years, not in it's current state anyway. I bet it turns into a BB league with all of the above schools dropping football.
The Cali schools are going to have their athletic departments gutted, so there goes any hope of Poly or Davis replacing the schools that will be forced to drop football. The EWU red turf sideshow reeks of desperation and after it fails to attract more fans and support we can pretty much count on their program going the way of Western Washington. NAU has been rumored to be in massive financial upheaval for about two years now, so we'll see how long they last. Weber gets zero fan support for FB, so I imagine they will be hard pressed to justify a very expensive sport. UNC has only won 2 or 3 games since joining the BSC so I don't see them justifying keeping FB.
The move down crowd will get their wettest dream fulfilled when UM is forced to move to D-2 because THERE WON'T BE ANYONE LEFT IN THE WEST TO PLAY AGAINST AT THE FCS LEVEL.
But the bright side is, the Griz will still get to play in the playoffs every year and as an added bonus we'll be in the same conference as those Western State and Ft Lewis teams PR and the rest of the Move Down crew loves watching so much. The Griz will also get to beat up on powerhouse GVSU. Unfortunately tickets will still be $50 for homecoming and Griz/Cat because you dumb schmucks don't understand what quality competition is or why we thought it mattered.
After about three seasons of being in D-2 the fans will quit showing up entirely and UM will go the way of University of Vermont (which is the east coast version of UM) and will drop football entirely.
But hey, at least we'll never have to hear GB and PR screaming bloody murder about paying for extra scholarships and Title 9 ever again. That alone will be worth it for me.
grizaremoregooder
Well-known member
I also heard this on the radio today-it was all gum flap-but the three teams mentioned were Utah, Colorado, and BYU.
And we won't have to look at DJollie starting first-half threads gloating over the Griz getting beat (like So. Dak. St.); predicting and hoping for losses; trying to make football comments without any understanding of the game of football and without even attending the games; needlessly trying to insult posters; claiming every alleged fight is gang-stomping (and making borderline racist comments); making up bald-faced lies in almost every post; and generally acting like a troll and jerk.
billings_poke said:
Spot on, as they say across the pond. The PAC-10 is comprised of flagship institutions in their states with academic standards requiring applicants for admission being in the upper percentiles of their graduating class. There is no college of medicine at BSU or anywhere in the state of Idaho, and not much to speak of in the way of nationally prominent faculty and alumni.
