|
|
Post by haleiwaaztec on Jun 10, 2010 8:57:05 GMT -8
if the 3 Texas schools that the Pac 10 wants decide NOT to leave their fellow state school - Baylor - behind, the Pac 10 will take Utah and be a 12 team conference. The Big 12 could take TCU to get back to 12 (if Nebraska doesn't get the invite they are expecting from the Big 10) or they could add another Texas state school - Houston - if Nebraska does leave.
To me, that is the worst case scenario - losing both Utah and TCU - which of course would lead to the MWC adding Boise State and maybe a few others (Nevada, Fresno, etc.)
|
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jun 10, 2010 9:04:09 GMT -8
Why would the PAC want Utah, if rebuffed by the Texas Schools I would go after Nebraska. CO has two neighbor states.
|
|
|
|
Post by Borg on Jun 10, 2010 9:06:58 GMT -8
If that is the case....there is (in my opinion) no way the Big 12 North division would add another Texas school. Texas already has their foot on the neck of that conference.
'Rumor' has it...that BYU has been in talks with the Big 12 for some time now, and has established some relationships (ie. game against OU last year, and game against Texas next year)...and would receive an invite to backfill for Colorado.
IF....the shuffle stops there.
Have to remember, that BYU did have a previous invite to the Big 12 once before, ...that is until Gov. Richardson from Texas put her foot down and stopped them from leaving Baylor out of the picture. So Baylor was in, and BYU was out.
That's the scuttlebutt for now....at least from the Cougar perspective.
|
|
|
|
Post by haleiwaaztec on Jun 10, 2010 11:49:17 GMT -8
Why would the PAC want Utah, if rebuffed by the Texas Schools I would go after Nebraska. CO has two neighbor states. The Pac 10 wants school that have some academic reputation to them as well and Utah fits this requirement (in addition to their athletic success). Also, Nebraska has been linked with the Big 10, not the Pac 10. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2010 11:57:03 GMT -8
Please, CU's academic reputation could not be worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsuphilip on Jun 10, 2010 12:13:59 GMT -8
You really think Big 12 would want TCU?  That doesn't make a lot of financial sense, BYU and Utah are both pulling in a ton more money than TCU, and TCU struggles to sell out a small stadium unless they are elite. |
|
|
|
Post by goaztecs on Jun 10, 2010 12:27:51 GMT -8
I don't see why we don't grab Boise St. now to give us some protection.
|
|
|
|
Post by survalli on Jun 10, 2010 15:11:30 GMT -8
I don't see why we don't grab Boise St. now to give us some protection. because TCU, Utah, and BYU could all be leaving, so they voted no for now. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jun 10, 2010 15:37:04 GMT -8
Please, CU's academic reputation could not be worse. Are you serous? The Univ. of Colorado is a member of the prestigious American Association of Universities, and has been since 1966. Out of the hundreds and hundreds of colleges and universities in the U.S., only about 60 belong to the A.A.U. CU's membership in that body labels it as an elite institution. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Jun 10, 2010 15:42:24 GMT -8
I don't see why we don't grab Boise St. now to give us some protection. because TCU, Utah, and BYU could all be leaving, so they voted no for now. Hair said there was no vote taken. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2010 16:18:32 GMT -8
Let's be clear about a few things.
1. Nebraska isn't going to the Pac since the Huskers are going to the Big Ten.
2. Regardless of what Pac-10 commish Scott said, his conference isn't going to stay put at 11 since that does nothing for the Pac. Therefore, if the Pac8/Big12-6+2 thing doesn't happen because whiny beotch Baylor manages to put the kibosh on it, the Pac is then going to what was its original position and has since been its fallback position, adding Colorado and Utah.
3. Having lost only Nebraska and Colorado, unless and until the Big Ten also takes Missouri, the obvious choice for the Big Ten would then be to offer BYU and, IMO, UNM. TCU is a complete no-go. Having the Frogs in the same conference would make it more difficult for UT to out-recruit TCU and because of TCU's location, adding the Frogs would require one of the Oklahoma schools to move to the North division.
So if the Pac becomes the Pac-12 rather than the Pac-16, the MWC will be down to just seven schools and will obviously add Boise to go to the requisite eight and then see what happens.
I think all of the above is going to moot, however, because the Pac-16 IS going to happen. Of course, the MWC could still lose Utah if aTm goes to the SEC since Utah would be the likely replacement for the Aggies. If that happens, Boise will be added and the MWC would be at nine again. Possible exception: If Missouri also has a fallback position. I bet they do. I'm thinking Mizzou has burnt so many bridges that it is going to leave the Big 12 even if the Big Ten doesn't take the Tigers and the Big 12 doesn't die. And I think that fallback position is the Big East. Only under that unlikely scenario can I see TCU being added to the Big 12.
|
|
|
|
Post by survalli on Jun 10, 2010 16:27:59 GMT -8
Let's be clear about a few things. 1. Nebraska isn't going to the Pac since the Huskers are going to the Big Ten. 2. Regardless of what Pac-10 commish Scott said, his conference isn't going to stay put at 11 since that does nothing for the Pac. Therefore, if the Pac8/Big12-6+2 thing doesn't happen because whiny beotch Baylor manages to put the kibosh on it, the Pac is then going to what was its original position and has since been its fallback position, adding Colorado and Utah. 3. Having lost only Nebraska and Colorado, unless and until the Big Ten also takes Missouri, the obvious choice for the Big Ten would then be to offer BYU and, IMO, UNM. TCU is a complete no-go. Having the Frogs in the same conference would make it more difficult for UT to out-recruit TCU and because of TCU's location, adding the Frogs would require one of the Oklahoma schools to move to the North division. So if the Pac becomes the Pac-12 rather than the Pac-16, the MWC will be down to just seven schools and will obviously add Boise to go to the requisite eight and then see what happens. I think all of the above is going to moot, however, because the Pac-16 IS going to happen. Of course, the MWC could still lose Utah if aTm goes to the SEC since Utah would be the likely replacement for the Aggies. If that happens, Boise will be added and the MWC would be at nine again. Possible exception: If Missouri also has a fallback position. I bet they do. I'm thinking Mizzou has burnt so many bridges that it is going to leave the Big 12 even if the Big Ten doesn't take the Tigers and the Big 12 doesn't die. And I think that fallback position is the Big East. Only under that unlikely scenario can I see TCU being added to the Big 12. all of your predictions indicate one thing...MWC will be farther away from BCS status than ever before. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 10, 2010 17:26:07 GMT -8
I don't see why we don't grab Boise St. now to give us some protection. because TCU, Utah, and BYU could all be leaving, so they voted no for now. Well, that would be accurate had there been a vote, but there wasn't a vote and since you weren't in the room, what you've written above is nothing more than your usual speculation. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 10, 2010 17:33:30 GMT -8
Please, CU's academic reputation could not be worse. Are you serous? The Univ. of Colorado is a member of the prestigious American Association of Universities, and has been since 1966. Out of the hundreds and hundreds of colleges and universities in the U.S., only about 60 belong to the A.A.U. CU's membership in that body labels it as an elite institution. AzWm McGill and U-Toronto have been members since the '20s, so it's not just American universities. But still, SUNY Buffalo is a member? Like any other academic organization, academic politics come into play. Not saying the members aren't great schools, but claiming that being a member automatically makes a school "elite" while not being a member does not is nonsense. =Bob =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuphilip on Jun 10, 2010 17:34:42 GMT -8
I don't see why we don't grab Boise St. now to give us some protection. because TCU, Utah, and BYU could all be leaving, so they voted no for now. just more speculation |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 10, 2010 17:40:20 GMT -8
Let's be clear about a few things. 1. Nebraska isn't going to the Pac since the Huskers are going to the Big Ten. 2. Regardless of what Pac-10 commish Scott said, his conference isn't going to stay put at 11 since that does nothing for the Pac. Therefore, if the Pac8/Big12-6+2 thing doesn't happen because whiny beotch Baylor manages to put the kibosh on it, the Pac is then going to what was its original position and has since been its fallback position, adding Colorado and Utah. 3. Having lost only Nebraska and Colorado, unless and until the Big Ten also takes Missouri, the obvious choice for the Big Ten would then be to offer BYU and, IMO, UNM. TCU is a complete no-go. Having the Frogs in the same conference would make it more difficult for UT to out-recruit TCU and because of TCU's location, adding the Frogs would require one of the Oklahoma schools to move to the North division. So if the Pac becomes the Pac-12 rather than the Pac-16, the MWC will be down to just seven schools and will obviously add Boise to go to the requisite eight and then see what happens. I think all of the above is going to moot, however, because the Pac-16 IS going to happen. Of course, the MWC could still lose Utah if aTm goes to the SEC since Utah would be the likely replacement for the Aggies. If that happens, Boise will be added and the MWC would be at nine again. Possible exception: If Missouri also has a fallback position. I bet they do. I'm thinking Mizzou has burnt so many bridges that it is going to leave the Big 12 even if the Big Ten doesn't take the Tigers and the Big 12 doesn't die. And I think that fallback position is the Big East. Only under that unlikely scenario can I see TCU being added to the Big 12. all of your predictions indicate one thing...MWC will be farther away from BCS status than ever before. In 2 or 3 years, the BCS is history, so it really doesn't matter. What matters is how many BCS teams will be left behind, how pissed off they are and whether or not they'd be willing to litigate with the current non-AQ conferences on the basis of anti-trust laws. And I have to say, I'm getting rather tired of your gloom and doom predictions based upon nothing more than idle speculation. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 10, 2010 17:44:20 GMT -8
Let's be clear about a few things. 2. Regardless of what Pac-10 commish Scott said, his conference isn't going to stay put at 11 since that does nothing for the Pac. Therefore, if the Pac8/Big12-6+2 thing doesn't happen because whiny beotch Baylor manages to put the kibosh on it, the Pac is then going to what was its original position and has since been its fallback position, adding Colorado and Utah. I don't see any way Baylor has the political muscle to pull that off. Only reason they were included in '94 was due to Richards being an alum and they've already become irrelevant with the Smack taking Colorado. They're really not different than TCU, SMU and Rice in '94 - small, private university - and would have been kicked to the curb then if it weren't for Richards. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by survalli on Jun 10, 2010 18:08:44 GMT -8
because TCU, Utah, and BYU could all be leaving, so they voted no for now. just more speculation ah philip, you Bob's Lackey here? |
|
|
|
Post by survalli on Jun 10, 2010 18:09:48 GMT -8
all of your predictions indicate one thing...MWC will be farther away from BCS status than ever before. In 2 or 3 years, the BCS is history, so it really doesn't matter. What matters is how many BCS teams will be left behind, how pissed off they are and whether or not they'd be willing to litigate with the current non-AQ conferences on the basis of anti-trust laws. And I have to say, I'm getting rather tired of your gloom and doom predictions based upon nothing more than idle speculation. =Bob and im tired of you following my posts around, you offer nothing to the conversation but your Simon Cowel critique. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2010 21:55:52 GMT -8
Ridiculous to believe that membership in some meaningless org means anything now. Well educated people in our wonderful rocky mountain state laugh at cu. Hell, even csu is more relevant than cu. . Lots of great drinking at cu, though. that's about it
|
|
That doesn't make a lot of financial sense, BYU and Utah are both pulling in a ton more money than TCU, and TCU struggles to sell out a small stadium unless they are elite.
