Blog Entry

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

Posted on: June 3, 2010 7:52 pm
Edited on: June 3, 2010 9:04 pm
 
Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott didn't exactly deny Thursday's Orangeblood.com's report regarding a raid on the Big 12. Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe didn't react at all, hurrying to an elevator with media trailing behind.

It's obvious the report that predicted the biggest upheaval, perhaps ever in conference affiliation, touched a nerve all over the country.

Scott told the Denver Post late Thursday afternoon in San Francisco only that there will be no offer this weekend. The internet report said that it "appears" the Pac-10 "is prepared" to invite Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Colorado from the Big 12. The "thought is," according to the story, that the Pac-10 would then start its own network.

"I don't expect anything definitive," Scott said of the Pac-10 meetings that begin on Friday. "Nothing's changed in terms of our timetable. We've been very consistent. We're on course and moving deliberately."

As the story moved into Thursday evening, the report appeared to gain traction. Scott has said from the beginning that he would like to have a plan of attack by this summer. It is known that the Pac-10 must have its membership finalized by December in order to begin the next round of television negotiations with Fox. Its current contract with Fox expires in 2012, the same year as the Big 12.

The two conferences have discussed a partnership and scheduling alliance that would fall short of a full merger.

Here are several thoughts about the report.

  Texas AD DeLoss Dodds and Texas A&M AD Bill Byrne are both on record within the last two days as saying they did not favor the Pac-10 because of the strain on the student-athletes. Byrne, in particular, was furious that the women's basketball team had to travel all night from the Spokane, Wash. to College Station after an NCAA Tournament loss. The team's plane landed at 6:30 a.m. CT. Players had to be in class at 8 a.m.

  On the other hand, Texas has long looked down its nose at having to play the likes of Baylor and Iowa State in the Big 12. The school might have also tired of whining from Missouri about uneven conference revenue distribution. Dodds said earlier this week, "We're going to be a player in whatever happens."

  Scott aims high. It's obvious he wasn't hired by the Pac-10 to vet out the likes of Utah and BYU. Pac-10 expansion has moved to another level. That doesn't mean they'll necessarily get six Big 12 teams. It might mean the Pac-10 is going to try like hell, though.

  Buyouts wouldn't be an issue with a raided Big 12. How do you buy out of a conference that doesn't exist? With half of its members gone, the remaining Big 12 teams would be scrambling.

  Beebe refused to answer reporters questions on Thursday at the Big 12 meetings in Kansas City, saying he would speak on Friday. That's out of character for the usually affable Beebe who headed for elevator with reporters tailing behind. Is the Big 12 reeling from a knockout blow, looking for a way to retrench?

  Anyone want to ask the Rose Bowl's opinion of this? The contract with the Pac-10 is for ... the Pac-10. Not a 16-team conglomerate that might advance Texas Tech to Pasadena. While the network deals are redone, don't forget some bowl contracts are going to have to reconfigured.

  Missouri and Nebraska have to be nervous. Those fans better hope their schools get invited to the Big Ten. If not, we're looking at the Mountain West suddenly inviting the Big 12 leftovers. Nebraska at New Mexico? Colorado State vs. Missouri for a division title? Not exactly the Big Ten, fellas.    

  The Mountain West could be in the right place at the right time. The league is expected to invite Boise State on Monday, expanding to 10 teams. The MWC is attempting to gain automatic BCS qualification status. Adding Missouri and Nebraska wouldn't hurt that pursuit.

  What does the Big Ten do if the Pac-10 becomes the first superconference? Or does it even matter? Missouri and Nebraska are still in play. How, then, does the SEC respond? If the report is true, the Pac-16(?) would pass the SEC in revenue paying out $20 million per team. The SEC/s new deal with CBS and ESPN guarantees each team $17 million.
Comments

Since: May 11, 2010
Posted on: June 4, 2010 10:21 am
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

Big TEN:  Rutgers, Notre Dame, Missouri, Nebraska, & Kansas
Pac-10: CU, A&M, Texas, OU, OSU, Texas Tech
SEC: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson
ACC: UConn, Syracuse, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pitt, USF, UCF, West Virginia 
Mountain West: Boise State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Baylor, Hawaii, Utah State, & Nevada




Since: Apr 11, 2009
Posted on: June 4, 2010 9:06 am
 

SEC Response?

jimbalya1,

You might want to think about more than just football when deciding that Miami would take the SEC money in a heartbeat.  One of the things that Miami has been improving drastically the past 10 years is their academic standings, and their academics are one of the reasons that Miami decided to leave the Big East for the ACC.  With the terrible academics in the majority of the SEC schools (with the obvious exceptions), this would hurt what Miami is trying to accomplish as being known both for great athletics and a great education.



Since: Feb 11, 2009
Posted on: June 4, 2010 4:28 am
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

Well, I have to admit that this story came out of the blue.  Is the Pac 10 ready to act while the Big Ten has only been willing to talk about possible action?  If the Pac 10 makes the first move, it would surely gain the initiative and place the Big Ten among the other coferences, asa reactor rather than proactor.  



Since: Jan 28, 2007
Posted on: June 4, 2010 1:56 am
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

I know it's a whole new world, but I get this as the Pac-10 striking first in order to get itself out there.  So, sure it may invite 6 teams, and the Big Ten might invite Nebraska and Missouri, and then what?  Although the SEC has said that it would be "reactionary," I don't think that means that the SEC sits on the sidelines until the Texas and Oklahoma schools pick another conference.  If the Texas and Oklahoma schools are actually willing to go to the Pac-10, I think it's a pretty safe bet that the SEC would stop playing coy and make a move for these teams.  The bids may go out, but I expect some hemming-and-hawing from the Texas and Oklahoma schools while they consider that every Pac-10 school is farther away from them than any of the current Big 12 schools.  That's a lot of missed classes, a lot of plane flights, a lot of logistical costs that you have to consider.  When you think about it, this is all just a leak by the Pac-10 to gauge the interest of the Big XII schools in joining their super-conference.  I don't think it's any more than that, and although these bids may allegedly come this summer, there is no way on earth that these schools will make up their mind that quickly.
No matter what, the Big Ten still rules this situation, and nobody will do anything (except Boise State to the MWC) until the Big Ten decides who it wants.   Everybody is just posturing until then.



Since: Jan 1, 2007
Posted on: June 4, 2010 1:19 am
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

Oregon State 4th in the Pac 10? Ummm, no. I think you meant Oregon.

And 2 divisions, 4 quadrants, either way doesn't work period in a 16 team conference. Like I said, you play an 8 game conference schedule, even a 9, you are still not going to complete a home-and-home with everyone for almost a decade, or more. They either have to go no divisions, and top two play in a title game (makes sense) or you only play part of your division, which is a failure waiting to happen because then it's possible to have 2 teams tied in the division and then you'd have to have 2 rounds to determine a champion.

And yes, the quadrants is what really screwed up the WAC, but it was an attempt to prevent the 16 year turn around for a home-and-home so they could create more matchups. Either way, I still think the rule should be the number of teams in a conference has to be less than or equal to the number of games played. 16 team conference and a 12 game schedule just don't mix.

And yes, Arkansas was in the Southwest, but it's more likely Texas and A&M would go to the SEC before Arkansas would breakaway again and go to the Big 12. You got to remember, Texas is a moneyhog in the Big 12. SEC, as far as I know, Arkansas gets an even share. And if Arkansas and/or LSU were to leave, you'd be going to a weak Big 12 because they'd be filling in spots left after a raid and I can assure Iowa St. and Baylor won't be the ones needing replacing.



Since: Nov 8, 2006
Posted on: June 4, 2010 1:18 am
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

From what I hear...

The Big 12 is going after Southern Cal and Cal to join them.




Sure, and if an astroid takes out part of California, Arizona, and the Pacific Northwest, then they just might accept.



Since: Jun 3, 2010
Posted on: June 3, 2010 11:58 pm
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

I bet you would feel completely different if Kansas was rumored to going to the big ten



Since: Feb 10, 2008
Posted on: June 3, 2010 11:49 pm
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

Did you really just leave Michigan out of the big boys for the Big 16? I know they have had a couple tough years but they will be back.



Since: Jan 21, 2010
Posted on: June 3, 2010 11:40 pm
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

I can't understand why the Big 10 and the Pac-10 can't leave us alone! I also can't understand why the NCAA doesn't do something to prevent conferences from preying on each other like this!



Since: Apr 1, 2010
Posted on: June 3, 2010 11:31 pm
 

Pac-10 to become first superconference, maybe

Miami will not go to the ACC.  President Donna Shalalah is an avid sports fan, but her goal is to make UM a top notch research institution. That pays a lot better than a football contract.  That means the ACC, unless the ACC is going to fold.  


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com