Taking Utah a "Major Disappointment" for Pac10

Favorite quote of the article:



"If Scott is rebuffed by the Longhorns and thus by the rest of the Big 12 South schools and is forced to then just take Utah for the 12th member it would be a major disappointment. Industry sources told Katz that a Pac-12 that just adds Colorado and Utah doesn't increase the value that much for the league in a traditional model of seeking a new television deal. The best-case scenario for the Pac-10 is to come home with Texas, a Pac-16 and a new television network that would rival the Big Ten network. "



http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5282178



Looks like Pac10 is being 'forced' to add Utah. Here to hoping they don't add them at all.

They could wait a year in hope of getting another school to join. Utah will always be there to grab.

Still lots of time for things to shake down, but the PAC could end up looking really stupid in the end if all they do is add Colorado and Utah. And I'll be laughing my hiney off.

The onus is now on the MWC to get a better TV deal. Do that, and some of the benefit to jumping to the PAC or Big 12 is gone. I would not blame Utah one bit for jumping ship when it could mean an increase of $$ by at least $15M a year or more, even if they are not totally wanted. That is huge. The MWC tv deal is crap doling out a paltry $1.25M per team, while the new PACx deal will get upwards of $15M a team. I'd love to see BYU get an extra $15M a year. Could improve facilities where needed, pay coaches more, plus it would help recruiting the top LDS athlete that might look elsewhere more. $$$ does not guarantee success, but it helps you achieve it. Utah may be a disappointment to the PAcx, but it is a bigger disappointment to me that they get it and we don't.

Think the Pac is regretting unloading the CU baggage from the Big 12 now? Can they still back out of that? I don't think that the Pac is excited about taking :utard: , they're simply left with no other options that the Elitist, tree-hugging, gay-marrying, abortion-supporting, leftist liberal Presidents in the Pac will accept.



"Utah - Because There Just Wasn't Anybody Else After Our Religious Discrimination"



"Utah - Because Having No Morals Or Values Really DOES Pay Off!"

The PAC or the Big 12 has to understand that BYU owns the SLC market, there is just no way around that. The PAC decided that not affiliating with a religious school was more important then owning the SLC market though so it will remain in the hands of the MWC unless the BIG 12 comes a callin.

33311710 wrote:



"Utah - Because There Just Wasn't Anybody Else After Our Religious Discrimination"



"Utah - Because Having No Morals Or Values Really DOES Pay Off!"

Nice. :lol:

33311710 wrote:
Think the Pac is regretting unloading the CU baggage from the Big 12 now? Can they still back out of that? I don't think that the Pac is excited about taking :utard: , they're simply left with no other options that the Elitist, tree-hugging, gay-marrying, abortion-supporting, leftist liberal Presidents in the Pac will accept.



"Utah - Because There Just Wasn't Anybody Else After Our Religious Discrimination"



"Utah - Because Having No Morals Or Values Really DOES Pay Off!"

I totally agree with the Pac's religious discrimination label. I kind of like the idea of the Pac-0 inviting BYU and then we turning them down.



I like that idea a lot.

CougarClaw wrote:

I totally agree with the Pac's religious discrimination label. I kind of like the idea of the Pac-0 inviting BYU and then we turning them down.



I like that idea a lot.

Lets start a rumor that that's the way it went down.

Why was everyone saying that Nebraska going to the Big-10 was going to be the start of the domino effect? Sound Texas was the key piece all along to the dissolution of the Big-12 and creation of the Pac-16.



I've never liked Texas, but sounds like they deserve some respect for showing loyalty and single-handedly saving the Big-12

tmoney35 wrote:
Why was everyone saying that Nebraska going to the Big-10 was going to be the start of the domino effect? Sound Texas was the key piece all along to the dissolution of the Big-12 and creation of the Pac-16.



I've never liked Texas, but sounds like they deserve some respect for showing loyalty and single-handedly saving the Big-12

It also helps that they got lots more money for staying....

The rich gets richer but it still leaves the seeds for future disbutes.

tmoney35 wrote:
Why was everyone saying that Nebraska going to the Big-10 was going to be the start of the domino effect? Sound Texas was the key piece all along to the dissolution of the Big-12 and creation of the Pac-16.



I've never liked Texas, but sounds like they deserve some respect for showing loyalty and single-handedly saving the Big-12

Because nothing was going to happen if Nebraska decided to stay. Once they decided that's when the heat was turned up for the rest of the Big 12-11-10?



No respect for Texas on my part for staying, the only reason they stayed is because they made more money staying than going. Am I happy they stayed? Absolutely, I loathe the idea of the super conferences because it would completely destroy college football for 60% of D1 teams.

At first I thought this was funny, but the more I thought about it, the angrier I got.



If they take Utah, and Utah is a "major disappointment," what does that make a school that didn't even make it to major-disappointment-but-we'll-still-throw-a-lot-of-money-at-you status?

tmoney35 wrote:
I've never liked Texas, but sounds like they deserve some respect for showing loyalty and single-handedly saving the Big-12

I would be loyal too if they paid me that much.

It's all about the $$$$. Money talks - the B.S. walks!! End of story. This was an attempt by the PAC-10 to grab & form an elite football conference w/ a HUGE TV contract! It nearly worked - but fell short. Texas still won -lots of $$$ coming their way. If the Yewts stay - I firmly believe the MWC can become an elite football conference - now - w/ the addition of Boise St. - and continuing to win solid Out of Conference games. If the Yewts stay - it looks good. If they leave - screw them & the mangy horse they rode in on!!!!

8)

Ddawg wrote:
If the Yewts stay - it looks good. If they leave - screw them & the mangy horse they rode in on!!!!

8)

I believe the correct phrase is "screw them and the mangy date they rode in on!!"

snoscythe wrote:
At first I thought this was funny, but the more I thought about it, the angrier I got.



If they take Utah, and Utah is a "major disappointment," what does that make a school that didn't even make it to major-disappointment-but-we'll-still-throw-a-lot-of-money-at-you status?

It makes you a school with a much bigger following and that brings in more revenue but is politically not aligned with damn pot smoking hippies, men who go after strange flesh, and people who kill babies.

Schmoe wrote:

At first I thought this was funny, but the more I thought about it, the angrier I got.



If they take Utah, and Utah is a "major disappointment," what does that make a school that didn't even make it to major-disappointment-but-we'll-still-throw-a-lot-of-money-at-you status?

It makes you a school with a much bigger following and that brings in more revenue but is politically not aligned with damn pot smoking hippies, men who go after strange flesh, and people who kill babies.

Why are you bringing the French in on this Schmoe? :sick:

bplewe wrote:

I've never liked Texas, but sounds like they deserve some respect for showing loyalty and single-handedly saving the Big-12

I would be loyal too if they paid me that much.

It like Woody Allen, a fine Frenchman, said:

“If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name at a Swiss bank.”