I still wish

[Natebishop3]

I wish we'd see a PAC16. I'd love to see Oklahoma and Texas, with a tossup between Kansas, KSU, Baylor, and Oklahoma State for the last two spots.

Not sure which two schools I'd want to see, and actually, I really don't even care about Texas. I'd be perfectly happy with OU, KSU, Kansas, and Oklahoma State or Baylor. Texas is too full of itself.

I'm just tired of all the SEC bullshit, and I think if we added a couple more powerhouse schools, like Oklahoma and Texas, or Kansas for basketball, it would really boost the credibility of the PAC.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

We need four more shitty teams to compete like the SEC does; more chum for the big fish up top to feed on.

 

[Natebishop3]

We need four more shitty teams to compete like the SEC does; more chum for the big fish up top to feed on.

Since I think those teams are mostly overrated anyway, they would serve to be some nice chum indeed

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

The whole conference thing is kind of stupid to me. I think they should be help to 9 teams so each team plays the entire conference. All conference champs, regardless of overall record make it to a playoff.

 

[Natebishop3]

The whole conference thing is kind of stupid to me. I think they should be help to 9 teams so each team plays the entire conference. All conference champs, regardless of overall record make it to a playoff.

I honestly hate the conference championship. Just one more game we could lose before getting to the Natty.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I honestly hate the conference championship. Just one more game we could lose before getting to the Natty.

That's why I think conferences should be no more than 9 teams. Also, they will have no good reason to play 3 high school teams pre conference.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The PtldPlatyPlan:

• Kick Utah and Colorado out.
• Bring in Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, Baylor.
• Those 6 plus the Arizona schools in one division (Southwest)
• California/Oregon/Washington schools in the other (Pacific)
• 9 conference games--7 against your own division, 2 against the other.
• Keep the conference title game.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Why KU/KSt over Utah and Colorado?

 

[Zalsa]

The PtldPlatyPlan:

• Kick Utah and Colorado out.
• Bring in Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, Baylor.
• Those 6 plus the Arizona schools in one division (Southwest)
• California/Oregon/Washington schools in the other (Pacific)
• 9 conference games--7 against your own division, 2 against the other.
• Keep the conference title game.

This. Though I'd kick out Colorado and add Boise or BYU in instead. Utah is doing fine.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Why KU/KSt over Utah and Colorado?

I like the natural rivalries. Utah and Colorado aren't rivals. Plus, Kansas brings some hoop cache, whereas Utah and Colorado bring nothing (except their media markets, which is why my plan would never happen).

 

[BrianFromWA]

Yeah, the media market thing was where I was going. Giving up DEN/SLC in order to get Manhattan/Lawrence....not so much.

I'd give CU/UTH a couple of years to build their programs back up using big-boy money. It took the Arizona schools a while to assimilate to the Pac-10. CU has some football tradition, and Utah seems to be building back up to a solid basketball program under Krystowiak.

Edit: and I don't see Boise or BYU ever being considered a top flight school for all of the things that go on outside football. For all the stress they put on sports, the Pac-12 has some pretty legit research institutions and academic cachet. Not that Boise sucks (or BYU is "too religious"), but I don't think they're even close to being on the same level as a university.

 

[Quack U!]

I'd bring in OK and OK State, Kansas and KState.... Pac -16.... put Kansas and Kansas St. to the north, and OK schools to the south. The Sooners and Cowboys would make the Pac-12 south in football interesting every year. Further the battle of OSU's and U of O's for football would be great. In three years USC will be dominant in the south again and Stoops and company could make them have to work for once. Kansas, UCLA, Oregon, Arizona and UW would be a nice hoops conference! K State is also a very fine coached football team that would finish no worse than 3rd in the north most years.

 

[Draco]

If the conference had more teams we'd have to play USC and UCLA even less. Once every 5 years. It would be a decade between them coming to Oregon. At that point the North and South are almost separate conferences.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Between OSU and KSU you could snag every JuCo player in the country!

 

[Natebishop3]

The PtldPlatyPlan:

• Kick Utah and Colorado out.
• Bring in Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, Baylor.
• Those 6 plus the Arizona schools in one division (Southwest)
• California/Oregon/Washington schools in the other (Pacific)
• 9 conference games--7 against your own division, 2 against the other.
• Keep the conference title game.

That's not a bad plan, but I don't think they'd kick anyone out. Has that ever been done?

I like adding Texas because of how strong they are, but I think they'd end up being too high maintenance and I think Baylor or Oklahoma State would be better for the conference as a whole.

 

[Natebishop3]

I'd bring in OK and OK State, Kansas and KState.... Pac -16.... put Kansas and Kansas St. to the north, and OK schools to the south. The Sooners and Cowboys would make the Pac-12 south in football interesting every year. Further the battle of OSU's and U of O's for football would be great. In three years USC will be dominant in the south again and Stoops and company could make them have to work for once. Kansas, UCLA, Oregon, Arizona and UW would be a nice hoops conference! K State is also a very fine coached football team that would finish no worse than 3rd in the north most years.

Yeah, and I like that Kansas would give us even more credibility in basketball. Maybe they're not a good football team, but they're easily one of the best basketball teams in the nation.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

That's not a bad plan, but I don't think they'd kick anyone out. Has that ever been done?

Probably not, but I wasn't trying to be realistic, just what I'd like to see.

Another expansion option that would be cool but completely impossible would be to get Texas Oklahoma and Kansas, and steal Nebraska from the B1G. Recreate the best of the Big12 without any of the little brother schools.

 

[Natebishop3]

Probably not, but I wasn't trying to be realistic, just what I'd like to see.

Another expansion option that would be cool but completely impossible would be to get Texas Oklahoma and Kansas, and steal Nebraska from the B1G. Recreate the best of the Big12 without any of the little brother schools.

The thing about Nebraska is that they suck at everything outside of football.

At least with Texas, Kansas, and even schools like Baylor, you have some really decent basketball programs as well. Can't just look at the PAC as a football conference. We've got some really good, storied basketball teams as well.

Kansas
Baylor
Texas
Even Oklahoma State

They've all had really good basketball teams.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The thing about Nebraska is that they suck at everything outside of football.

At least with Texas, Kansas, and even schools like Baylor, you have some really decent basketball programs as well. Can't just look at the PAC as a football conference. We've got some really good, storied basketball teams as well.

Kansas
Baylor
Texas
Even Oklahoma State

They've all had really good basketball teams.

True. I'm just thinking about the fan base, and the TV money that comes along with them. Nebraska football probably brings on more money to a conference than all those schools' hoops teams combined.

Sent from my LG-LS840 using Tapatalk

 

[Natebishop3]

True. I'm just thinking about the fan base, and the TV money that comes along with them. Nebraska football probably brings on more money to a conference than all those schools' hoops teams combined.

Sent from my LG-LS840 using Tapatalk

I really don't know anything about the revenue generated by basketball compared to football, but I'd have to think that Kansas must make some decent bank from hoops, wouldn't they?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I really don't know anything about the revenue generated by basketball compared to football, but I'd have to think that Kansas must make some decent bank from hoops, wouldn't they?

Well, I'm just speculating about how they would impact the conference as a whole, but here's an ESPN report from 2008 showing athletic department revenue/expenses, and you can see that Nebraska's revenue from ticket sales is nearly double that of Kansas'. (By the way, the "media rights" figure doesn't really tell you much--Oregon State comes in 10th in the country in that table). Also, I found this report from 2011 on the most profitable athletic programs. Nebraska football came in 13th, whereas no basketball program was in the top 20.

Not scientific by any means, but it seems clear to me that even in a down cycle, a football program with significant history is going to be worth much more than even an elite basketball program.

 

[Natebishop3]

Well, I'm just speculating about how they would impact the conference as a whole, but here's an ESPN report from 2008 showing athletic department revenue/expenses, and you can see that Nebraska's revenue from ticket sales is nearly double that of Kansas'. (By the way, the "media rights" figure doesn't really tell you much--Oregon State comes in 10th in the country in that table). Also, I found this report from 2011 on the most profitable athletic programs. Nebraska football came in 13th, whereas no basketball program was in the top 20.

Not scientific by any means, but it seems clear to me that even in a down cycle, a football program with significant history is going to be worth much more than even an elite basketball program.

Yeah that makes sense. Also, strength of schedule means so much more to football than it does basketball. Having an Oklahoma, a Texas, and a Nebraska would make the PAC so much stronger in the eyes of the voters.