I think the equation for expansion is simple - the Pac would need a group of schools to balance California to keep CA schools as one block or California schools will be split up for the benefit of other wanker schools. So at the current time, that basically means Texas + enough in that region to make Texas feel like they aren't on an island.

ducky23;842539207 said:

---

Please. Their acceptance rate is what it is because there's not a single person on this board who even considered applying there.

---

Well consider me unworthy of your respect because I went to Grad school and got my M.S. there...don't worry, I still have a healthy self esteem........:cool:

GB54;842539208 said:

---

I think Baylor and TCU are better football options but don't know whether two private religious schools would fit into a mostly public non sectarian conference with only two private schools, both of whom worship Satan.

---

I'm a pretty stout agnostic, but I'd much rather add strong academic schools (like Baylor, rice, smu, and tcu) then to include marginal schools that happen to be public and non sectarian.

I hope we take SDSU in the Pac just for their women.

TheSouseFamily;842539215 said:

---

I'm not comparing SDSU to Cal, numnuts. But the data on admissions, GPA, SAT/ACT) suggests they certainly compare (favorably in some cases) with other schools in the Pac-12 like the Ariizonas, Wazzu, Utah, etc.

---

I'm not comparing sdsu to cal either. The point was that acceptance rate is a poor indicator. It's like looking at how many wins a pitcher has.

Acceptance rate is only a good indicator if you also look at the academic profile of who is applying there.

Now you want to say that the applicants have similar numbers to wazzu students. Fine. You should have said that in the first place. Because acceptance rate says nothing.

ducky23;842539227 said:

---

I'm not comparing sdsu to cal either. The point was that acceptance rate is a poor indicator. It's like looking at how many wins a pitcher has.

Acceptance rate is only a good indicator if you also look at the academic profile of who is applying there.

Now you want to say that the applicants have similar numbers to wazzu students. Fine. You should have said that in the first place. Because acceptance rate says nothing.

---

Admissions rates aren't a perfect proxy but they do say something. The fact that Arizona is around 80% and Stanfurd is 8% (or whatever it is) says something. And I use the term numnuts in endearing fashion.

None. I would send CU, Utah, AZ and ASU packing thus returning to the glory days of the P8.

TheSouseFamily;842539231 said:

---

Admissions rates aren't a perfect proxy but they do say something. The fact that Arizona is around 80% and Stanfurd is 8% (or whatever it is) says something. And I use the term numnuts in endearing fashion.

---

I understand what you're saying. But most people would consider Arizona at least as good if not a better school than sdsu. So, in theory, there shouldn't be such a huge difference in acceptance rates between the two schools.

jamonit;842539128 said:

---

We would never add most of those schools academic profiles. Come on now

---

We will also never add a school than is denominational. Sorry BYU, TCU, SMU etc. Texas can't come politically unless we bring in other Texas public schools. Not sure that works and why would Texas be willing to split TV revenues equally like the Pac requires?

Boise and SDSU make the most sense to bring in a couple of nice TV markets, and they could be split among the divisions. You sorta lose the geographical rival thing (assuming Utah and Colorado are now rivals). You then would have to add two other teams and I'm just don't see the other candidates have strong enough programs. If the money made sense, I'm not sure the academic profiles would matter as much as the athletic profiles.

BearBackerinLA;842539145 said:

---

In an interview Wednesday, Pac-12 President Larry Scott wouldn't comment on the conference's assessment of any specific school. But he said that when the conference considers new members "the academic brand is as important as the athletic brand." He said the Pac-12 "prides itself on being best of breed academically as well as athletically."

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903703604576584771531621708

---

yes, because ASU won't take just anyone... you have to at least be a high school graduate. Scott is an excellent salesman, but full of it.

The California/Arizona Pac 12 schools will never allow SDSU into the conference. I don't honestly think the Pac-12 is looking to lock up San Diego, Fresno, Reno, Boise, Fort Collins....the prize is Texas/Oklahoma and I'd be willing to bet they allow two tag alongs for this to happen.

You aren't looking to add more schools sniffing in your recruiting area you want to open up new areas for your conference. The Pac-12 already owns San Diego and the west recruiting..for the most part. Texas is the recruiting gold mine we need to tap into. As for TV money, why split up revenue with SDSU or Boise when their TVs are already watching Pac-12 games?

BearPD;842539239 said:

---

The California/Arizona Pac 12 schools will never allow SDSU into the conference. I don't honestly think the Pac-12 is looking to lock up San Diego, Fresno, Reno, Boise, Fort Collins....the prize is Texas/Oklahoma and I'd be willing to bet they allow two tag alongs for this to happen.

---

I would agree this is optimal from a revenue standpoint, as long as its not SMU or Baylor doing the tagging. Just to much baggage for all the existing conference state schools to deal with. That said, I don't thing there is any chance Texas is going to be willing to share TV revenues equally. Nice to dream, but the Pac 12 next year likley will remain the Pac 12.

wifeisafurd;842539241 said:

---

I would agree this is optimal from a revenue standpoint, as long as its not SMU or Baylor doing the tagging. Just to much baggage for all the existing conference state schools to deal with. That said, I don't thing there is any chance Texas is going to be willing to share TV revenues equally. Nice to dream, but the Pac 12 next year likley will remain the Pac 12.

---

Not to knock SDSU or Boise but they don't add value. I'd be good with OK State/Tex Tech which is what I believe was the package deal before it fell apart a few years ago. Agree, I can't see expansion anytime soon. The Big 12 is still in a slow death spiral. Any team that joins now better have a plan B. I'd hate to see the SEC snatch Oklahoma up though because I think that forces Texas' hand and they wind up in the Big 10.

wifeisafurd;842539241 said:

---

I would agree this is optimal from a revenue standpoint, as long as its not SMU or Baylor doing the tagging. Just to much baggage for all the existing conference state schools to deal with. That said, I don't thing there is any chance Texas is going to be willing to share TV revenues equally. Nice to dream, but the Pac 12 next year likley will remain the Pac 12.

---

I think down the road a bigger stimulus might be a 4 by 16 alignment and the national title playoffs. With this alignment the conference championships serve as the first round of the playoffs leaving four semi-finalists. This is a potentially huge revenue machine and these four conferences would be big enough to flourish with or without their NCAA overlords while shutting everyone else out.

wifeisafurd;842539237 said:

---

Boise and SDSU make the most sense to bring in a couple of nice TV markets, and they could be split among the divisions. You sorta lose the geographical rival thing (assuming Utah and Colorado are now rivals). You then would have to add two other teams and I'm just don't see the other candidates have strong enough programs. If the money made sense, I'm not sure the academic profiles would matter as much as the athletic profiles.

---

Boise is not a 'nice market'. According to Nielson media market rankings for 2014-2015, LA has 5.5 Million households, SF has 2.48 Million, and the smallest media market (amongst the associated big cities) is Salt Lake City with a tick under 900,000. SLC is also the 34th largest media market, Boise St is 109 and consists of 264 thousand households. You would need 3 Boises to match the bottom of the Pac-12 media markets, that is why they will never join.

For reference, San Diego is 28th at 1.08 Million households, while Portland is 23rd at 1.15 Million and Phoenix and Seattle are at 11 and 14 respectively with a little over 1.8 Million households.

wifeisafurd;842539237 said:

---

We will also never add a school than is denominational. Sorry BYU, TCU, SMU etc. Texas can't come politically unless we bring in other Texas public schools. Not sure that works and why would Texas be willing to split TV revenues equally like the Pac requires?

Boise and SDSU make the most sense to bring in a couple of nice TV markets, and they could be split among the divisions. You sorta lose the geographical rival thing (assuming Utah and Colorado are now rivals). You then would have to add two other teams and I'm just don't see the other candidates have strong enough programs. If the money made sense, I'm not sure the academic profiles would matter as much as the athletic profiles.

---

I disagree with the Aztec/Boise for the Pac 12.

Aztecs/Fresno State would be the best.

golden sloth;842539257 said:

---

Boise is not a 'nice market'. According to Nielson media market rankings for 2014-2015, LA has 5.5 Million households, SF has 2.48 Million, and the smallest media market (amongst the associated big cities) is Salt Lake City with a tick under 900,000. SLC is also the 34th largest media market, Boise St is 109 and consists of 264 thousand households. You would need 3 Boises to match the bottom of the Pac-12 media markets, that is why they will never join.

For reference, San Diego is 28th at 1.08 Million households, while Portland is 23rd at 1.15 Million and Phoenix and Seattle are at 11 and 14 respectively with a little over 1.8 Million households.

---

Just say no to Boise...

Boise is at their peak and draw 32,000 a game with a small TV market.

To compare...The Aztecs draw 32,000 a game and still have much room to grow...and are the #28 market in the nation.

What happens to the Boise market when they start losing? That market is done. It is nothing.

Fresno State and/or UNLV would be much better.

Steve Aztec;842539264 said:

---

Just say no to Boise...

Boise is at their peak and draw 32,000 a game with a small TV market.

To compare...The Aztecs draw 32,000 a game and still have much room to grow...and are the #28 market in the nation.

What happens to the Boise market when they start losing? That market is done. It is nothing.

Fresno State and/or UNLV would be much better.

---

Don't get this crowd going about Fresno, Steve!

TheSouseFamily;842539267 said:

---

Don't get this crowd going about Fresno, Steve!

---

Oh no....Bad topic?

Hey, I have to be truthful. It is my nature. The Aztecs and Fresno State would be the ticket for the Pac 12.

Can you imagine the battles within this conf? $C going to Fresno? Ohhhhh Myyyyy.

Steve Aztec;842539263 said:

---

I disagree with the Aztec/Boise for the Pac 12.

Aztecs/Fresno State would be the best.

---

No way...at least San Diego (by USN&WR) is ranked as a National University with research capabilities. Schools like Boise St, San Jose St., Fresno State are classified as Regional Universities. Fresno St. really is a podunk school to be frank though it does have some good football teams at times. I know SDSU is a cut above these guys, but you are playing with the big boys now. Calif. State schools are far down the list when Texas, Oklahoma, Okie State and the like are in play.

Cal_Fan2;842539271 said:

---

No way...at least San Diego (by USN&WR) is ranked as a National University with research capabilities. Schools like Boise St, San Jose St., Fresno State are classified as Regional Universities. Fresno St. really is a podunk school to be frank though it does have some good football teams at times. I know SDSU is a cut above these guys, but you are playing with the big boys now. Calif. State schools are far down the list when Texas, Oklahoma, Okie State and the like are in play.

---

I understand where you are coming from...But once again I am talking about TV money...AND the 15th and 16th team of a conf.

If TV demands that all major conf's go to 15 and 16 teams...Is the Pac 12 going to find that perfect fit for academics? Or give in to TV money.

Just saying...Money rules all.

***And I already addressed the OU/Texas situation for the Pac 12. That is still a very good possibility, but that doesn't matter to the Aztecs and Fresno. If everyone goes to 16 and OU/Texas come to the Pac 12, that opens 2 more spots in the Big 12.***

Steve Aztec;842539273 said:

---

I understand where you are coming from...But once again I am talking about TV money...AND the 15th and 16th team of a conf.

If TV demands that all major conf's go to 15 and 16 teams...Is the Pac 12 going to find that perfect fit for academics? Or give in to TV money.

Just saying...Money rules all.

---

But San Diego and Fresno are already in our conference footprint for TV purposes, even if the local teams are not. They add very little value, and then reduce everyone's share by a lot. I'm not saying Boise is any better. But if it's not Texas/Oklahoma, then I am guessing expansion is a non-starter for the Pac-12.

grandmastapoop;842539275 said:

---

But San Diego and Fresno are already in our conference footprint for TV purposes, even if the local teams are not. They add very little value, and then reduce everyone's share by a lot. I'm not saying Boise is any better. But if it's not Texas/Oklahoma, then I am guessing expansion is a non-starter for the Pac-12.

---

Not if big TV money demands it. All current expansion has to do with money.

grandmastapoop;842539275 said:

---

But San Diego and Fresno are already in our conference footprint for TV purposes, even if the local teams are not. They add very little value, and then reduce everyone's share by a lot. I'm not saying Boise is any better. But if it's not Texas/Oklahoma, then I am guessing expansion is a non-starter for the Pac-12.

---

This. 100% this. SDSU brings nothing to the table even when talking big money.

Steve Aztec;842539269 said:

---

Oh no....Bad topic?

Hey, I have to be truthful. It is my nature. The Aztecs and Fresno State would be the ticket for the Pac 12.

Can you imagine the battles within this conf? $C going to Fresno? Ohhhhh Myyyyy.

---

Too many Pac-12 teams have gotten the massively drunk, violent "you think you're better'n me?" treatment from Fresno fans. The last time Cal played in Fresno is, well the last time Cal will play in Fresno. After that game, the major donors at Cal were clear with the previous AD that scheduling a football game in Fresno was grounds for immediate termination. And they rarely throw their weight around on anything. Cal is not the only Pac-12 school that feels this way.

71Bear;842539233 said:

---

None. I would send CU, Utah, AZ and ASU packing thus returning to the glory days of the P8.

---

Never going to happen, unfortunately. My dream of the Pac-16 when it looked like it might happen was that the Pac-8 would play on one side and either we don't play the other side at all except in a conference championship, or we play two games against the other side that don't count toward the conference standings. Pac-16 is the only way you get a Pac-8.

Pac-14: add Texass and OU only (we don't want others mentioned).

Otherwise, stay Pac-12.

golden sloth;842539257 said:

---

Boise is not a 'nice market'. According to Nielson media market rankings for 2014-2015, LA has 5.5 Million households, SF has 2.48 Million, and the smallest media market (amongst the associated big cities) is Salt Lake City with a tick under 900,000. SLC is also the 34th largest media market, Boise St is 109 and consists of 264 thousand households. You would need 3 Boises to match the bottom of the Pac-12 media markets, that is why they will never join.

For reference, San Diego is 28th at 1.08 Million households, while Portland is 23rd at 1.15 Million and Phoenix and Seattle are at 11 and 14 respectively with a little over 1.8 Million households.

---

Boise (not Idaho) is the 112th market per ESPN. There is a difference between market size and saturation. Per ESPN, Boise State football draws essentially the same numbers of eyers as Utah or Colorado football, except for when SC is playing.

BearPD;842539246 said:

---

Not to knock SDSU or Boise but they don't add value. I'd be good with OK State/Tex Tech which is what I believe was the package deal before it fell apart a few years ago. Agree, I can't see expansion anytime soon. The Big 12 is still in a slow death spiral. Any team that joins now better have a plan B. I'd hate to see the SEC snatch Oklahoma up though because I think that forces Texas' hand and they wind up in the Big 10.

---

Concur.

The only way in which the Pac-12 would ever expand is to add to the current conference footprint and add large media markets. Further, 14 is not a good number of schools because 1 school would be added to the Pac-12 South and 1 school would be added to the Pac-12 North. No, you'd have to go big by adding 4 schools so that the original Pac-8 would be one division, and the Arizonas, Colorado, Utah and the 4 new members would make up the other division.

Further, travel distances between the Arizona schools, Colorado, Utah and the 4 new members would have to be within 3 hours of each other by air.

The only schools that really meet all of those tests while bringing large followings are Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and one other school (probably Texas Tech). Texas A&M had their chance a number of years ago and ultimately decided to bolt for the SEC.

There's also the consideration of what happens to the remaining Big XII schools should expansion as I've outlined happen: where do those schools end up? Will it make any difference to any of the other existing Power 5 Conferences? Would it set off another round of expansion or would it cause the American Athletic Conference to join with the remaining Big XII schools to claim Power 5 Conference status? In short, what's the end game after we essentially breakup the Big XII? The remaining 6 members would either have to join existing conferences or try to expand their own meager numbers to maintain Division I-A status as a conference.

There are lots of moving parts here and there would be repercussions, some of which may not be foreseeable.

Steve Aztec;842539264 said:

---

The Aztecs draw 32,000 a game and still have much room to grow...and are the #28 market in the nation.

---

Isn't the stadium future of the Aztecs WAY up in the air? If the Chargers get a new stadium in San Diego, maybe the Aztecs can play there, too. But if the Chargers go to LA, and the stadium is blown up, what of the Aztecs?

GB54;842539251 said:

---

I think down the road a bigger stimulus might be a 4 by 16 alignment and the national title playoffs.

---

Real problem with that is how to get to 4 conferences. Nothing can really happen until 2023, though if there were homes for enough Big 12 teams, they could vote to dissolve the conference. ACC, SEC, and BT at 14, Pac 12 at 12 means exactly 10 slots to get to 64. I can't remember if it takes 2/3 or 3/4 to dissolve the Big 12, but that's 7 or 8 teams (enter Notre Dame problem). Now you'd have 4 conferences + TV network(s) acting together to dissolve a 5th - is that now collusion?

But there are not quite enough slots for all P5 teams + Notre Dame at 64, so we would never see SDSU or UNLV getting upgraded or whatever... and at least one school would be kicked out of p5. OK, so 5 power conferences at 16? That makes no friggin sense. Maybe 4 power conferences at 20 each? Then one has 15 slots to upgrade, but the geography out west would mean 2 divisions that are imbalanced or splitting CA.

If we went to 16 with quadrants, it would be the Oklahoma schools, Texas, and to be determined. Even the Longhorn Network is no longer a major albatross within the realm of realignment.

Criteria for Pac-12 Expansion:
1. Academics
2. TV market addition
3. Non-religious school
4. Reasonable geographic footprint

Of the OP's list, Texas would be the only one that qualifies. Because the Pac likes to expand in pairs, the only likely "second" school would be Oklahoma or perhaps Kansas.

Some thoughts:

1. BYU is a non-starter for 2 reasons: not a research university and their refusal to play on Sundays (no problem for football, but basketball and Olympic sports need Sunday games).

2. The discussion about academics misses the point. It's not about acceptance rates or SAT scores, it is about the definition of a research university: does the university invest a lot in research, and does it grant a wide range of Ph.D.'s? ASU, for instance is a lousy undergraduate school, but has a number of well-established Ph.D. programs as well as recognized scholars. Currently, all Pac12 schools are research universities. By most definitions, SDSU, Fresno, BYU, Boise, etc. are not. Texas, OU, OSU, Baylor are.

3. One theory is that eventually we will go to 4 16-team "super conferences." If that happens, it is likely that the B12 will be put to rest, and the 4 survivors will be the B10, P12, ACC, and SEC. The B10 and P12 will then presumably cannibalize the old B12, with the remainder going to the ACC.