Pac 10 expansion chatter
By Bruce Marshall
Why let everybody else have all the fun?
That might have something to do with the announcement from Walnut Creek last week that the Pac-10 is going to seriously explore the possibility of expanding from 10 to 12 schools. This isn't the first time the subject has been broached out west; several years ago, Texas and Texas A&M were both formally offered invitations that were rejected out of hand. But there has been little movement in that "expansion" direction over the last decade, which is why last week's announcement by new Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott came as something of a surprise.
Or, maybe it wasn't much of a surprise, given some of the dynamics involved, which include a number of conference ADs and school presidents now pushing the idea. Plus with current TV deals expiring in 2012 and negotiations on new media deals set to begin soon. Commissioner Scott even set a definitive timetable. "Realistically," said the commish in a conference call last week, "if we are going to consider this in the foreseeable future, it really is in the next 12 months."
The conference, however, has been mostly loathe to make any adjustments in the 32 years since it last expanded, when Arizona and Arizona State were imported from the old WAC in 1978. Even then, the earth had to move to admit the Wildcats and Sun Devils, as a few schools, Stanford in particular, were not crazy about adding a couple of athletic programs where admission requirements were comparatively more lax. But the forward thinkers of the day were rewarded by annexing UA and ASU, the crown educational jewels in an adjacent state that has experienced subsequent explosive growth over the past few decades. Not to mention including what has become a major TV market in Phoenix.
Nonetheless, observers of the college scene have long noted the hubris of the Pac-10, which many believed would permanently quell the idea of expanding beyond the current 10 members. Eventually, however, the Pac-10 schools arrive at the same conclusions as others around the country. Case in point is the conference basketball tournament, which made its original debut in the Pac a bit later than most leagues in 1987 but was discontinued after the 1990 event for "academic" reasons that only figured to apply to the Ivy League. But when the Big Ten finally broke with its traditions and implemented its own hoop tourney, the Pac-10 decided to reintroduce the event in 2002. Likewise, after most of the major conferences in the nation have undergone alterations over the past two decades, now the Pac-10 wants to follow suit, and is even reviving the talk of a Pac-10 TV network, although it might want to consult with the Big Ten (whose Big Ten TV Network went through a rough introductory phase before finally establishing wider availability, now to an estimated 75 million homes) and Mountain West (which is still struggling to justify its TV network, The Mtn.). Another obligatory byproduct of an expansion to 12 teams is a conference football title game, in which the Arizona Cardinals' glistening U of P Stadium in Glendale, Arizona would seem to provide a perfect early December venue.
There are, however, a couple of other obstacles the Pac-10's pro-expansion forces have to deal with before anything can happen. The current TV contracts are not as well-balanced as some of the other conferences around the country, with revenue splits greatly favoring the schools (like Southern Cal) that make more national appearances. It's not the straight split between all of the members like some other conferences, including the Big Ten, so it's unsure how the "privileged" class in the Pac-10 will accept any changes to the status quo. Or if any potential targets in the Big XII would consider the move worthwhile. Secondly, Pac-10 conference bylaws dictate a unanimous vote before adding any additional members, where a school such as Stanford (which is on record as saying it will not align with any faith-based institution...such as BYU) could be expected to veto a variety of candidates. And true to its nature, the conference is going to be very particular about the academic credentials of any candidates, who, among other things, will be expected to meet the "research" criteria.
(That sort of academic hubris is enough to make some fans chuckle. That's because despite all of these academic and research credentials, Pac-10 athletic programs have never been above scandal and corruption, both academic and otherwise. Indeed, some of the more-egregious cases of NCAA rules violations have been committed by Pac-10 schools, almost of which, except Stanford, being slapped with sanctions for various shenanigans at one time or another.)
Whatever, with the Big Ten also announcing plans to expand (in its case adding one more school to get to twelve members), it could make for an interesting next 12 months or so in the expansion area. From our discussions with various sorts in the know about such matters, following is our "handicap" of potential Pac-10 targets.
1) Texas and Texas A&M...Although the Longhorns and Aggies have already rejected the Pac-10 once, they might get another call just in case they have changed their minds. Which is highly unlikely, considering how both have since established beachheads in the Big XII, where they (especially Texas) retain positions of prominence. If there was no motivation for the Longhorns and Aggies to make a move over a decade ago there certainly isn't going to be any motivation for either to do so now.
In a related matter, and while we're in the Big XII portion of Texas, we might as well mention Texas Tech, which has received a bit of peripheral mention as a possible Pac-10 target. Sources, however, not only believe that Pac-10 interest is unlikely, but that the Red Raiders' interest would be almost zero, considering that much of their alumni base is in Texas, and would not react well to affiliating with west coast schools rather than longtime rivals more conveniently located in the Lone Star State and elsewhere in the Big XII.
2) Utah and BYU... See our previous point relating to BYU, and the unlikelihood that Stanford would ever give a "yay" vote to the Cougars. Add in the fact that the Provo school doesn't seem to meet the "research" requirements and has its own sometimes-awkward scheduling issues since it won't play on Sundays, and the subject of BYU is probably a non-starter for the Pac-10 anyway. Although the Cougs might have support in some quarters because BYU would in fact enhance the athletic profile of the Pac-10 and offer facilities as good or better than any in the league (the basketball Marriott Center is far bigger than any Pac-10 home court and seats more than twice as much as some Pac-10 arenas), others believe the real killer in the whole BYU/Pac-10 talk is LDS support of the controversial California Prop 8 ballot measure that passed in 2008, but whose opponents had lots of vocal support in the California academic community. Plenty of administrators, faculty, and supporters of Stanford, Cal, USC, and UCLA would likely nix BYU on those grounds alone.
Utah, however, is a different matter. Not directly affiliated with the Mormon church, it avoids that potential Pac-10 pothole. Utah is also a respected research establishment, with its highly-regarded Cancer and Primary Children's Institutes. It could deliver a not-so-insignificant Salt Lake City TV market (which ranks 31st, compared to Tucson's 62nd, Spokane/Puillman's 75th, and Eugene/Corvallis' 119th). Athletic facilities are top-notch, with the gleaming Rice-Eccles Stadium (which received a spiffy facelift for the 2002 Winter Olympics) easily able to expand from its current 50,000-range up to 70,000, while the Huntsman Center (which once hosted a Final Four) would rank as one of the Pac-10's best basketball facilities. As a Delta hub and served by Southwest Airlines, Salt Lake City is also a very good fit if travel considerations are an issue. Moreover, the Utes bring something to the table in the big sports of football and basketball, having fielded ranked teams lately in both sports.
But a bigger question for Utah will be if it wants to break its long-term alliance with nearby BYU, which, along with Air Force, Wyoming, and Colorado State, were the driving forces behind the whole idea of the Mountain West (New Mexico, UNLV, and San Diego State were "invited" to join along after the other five decided to break away from what had become an unwieldy, 16-team WAC in the late '90s). There is also talk that the BCS, under possible congressional threat from Senator Orrin Hatch, is likely to add the Mountain West to its group, guaranteeing entry into one of the big football bowl games. Given Utah's influence in the Mountain West and creation of its TV network, the Utes might think twice about jumping to the Pac-10, especially if the MWC champ is really going to be awarded an automatic ticket into the BCS.
3) Colorado...If Texas & Texas A&M and BYU are off the table, then Colorado becomes the next most-logical Pac-10 target after Utah. Although Boulder is a bit further from the coastal schools than Salt Lake City, it is a short ride from Denver and delivers that big TV market to the Pac-10. CU should also be able to satisfy the Pac-10's academic and research issues. Moreover, sources say the Buffs might look very favorably upon an affiliation with the Pac-10. It is not lost upon many CU followers that the "glory generation" of Buff football featured numerous high-profile recruits from California, which many believe should be a bit more-fertile recruiting territory for CU than Texas, where the Buffs have not been able to make much impact now that they are competing with the Texas and Oklahoma schools (and many others) for the Lone Star State's talent pool.
In a related development, with Missouri rumored to be one of the Big Ten's targets, and CU possibly in the Pac-10's sights, there is a chance the Big XII might have to replace one or two members in the near future. In which case you could expect TCU to be quickly invited to fill a gap, with Arkansas from the SEC likely to get a call as well. Which, if dominoes fall that way, might see Clemson get an invitation from the SEC to replace the Razorbacks, but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves.
4) TCU...Moving down the totem pole, if the Pac-10 can't get anywhere with the Big XII Longhorns, Aggies, and Buffs, and can or can't convince Utah to join, then TCU (if it hasn't been invited to the Big XII) could become a candidate. Don't let the "Texas Christian" name fool you; although the school is affiliated with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), it is not governed by it, and the religious influence in negligible, if that much, on campus, hardly as overt as the LDS influence at BYU. Stanford is thus not likely to object on those faith-based grounds. The Horned Frogs could also introduce the Pac-10 into the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex, and for the moment bring some football prestige with them. Some Pac-10 schools might like the exposure in the Lone Star State (the Arizona schools and USC and UCLA in particular), although it's a bit longer ride from the Pacific Northwest to DFW, and TCU is not quite the geographic fit as would the Utah schools or Colorado. Though we hear that TCU is thinking that it will get a call from the Big XII if Missouri bolts, it would have to consider the Pac-10 a step up from its current Mountain West affiliation. Not the longest shot on the board.
5) San Diego State...Geographically a good fit, but that's about it. The Pac-10 already considers the San Diego territory as part of its market, with L.A. schools USC and UCLA not too far away. And the Pac-10 already has a presence in a pair of San Diego bowl games (Poinsettia and Holiday). SDSU also doesn't pass muster if the Pac-10 is really serious about the "research" institution qualifier, and besides, we doubt UCLA, Berkeley, or Stanford are interested in affiliating with a "California State University" anyway. But because SDSU is still brimming with potential, it might not be immediately rejected. The football program remains a sleeping giant, yet it is awash in red ink, and there could be some long-range stadium issues at SDSU if the NFL Chargers actually leave aging Qualcomm Stadium in the next few years. Should the Chargers land in a new facility nearby in Chula Vista (as has been discussed) or elsewhere in the San Diego area, the Aztecs could likely follow along as a co-tenant. But if the Bolts leave San Diego (which isn't out of the question), the city is likely to sell and/or demolish Qualcomm. Since the school would be an unlikely buyer of the stadium, there's a chance the Aztecs, if they want to keep a football program, might eventually have no choice other than to ask the MLB Padres if they could use Petco Park. Former Padres owner John Moores was on record as being open to the possibility, but with the Padres ownership in the midst of changing hands, we're not sure how the new Padre front office would react. It's all something the Pac-10 would rather not worry about.
6) Boise State...Although the Broncos are a chic football commodity at the moment and could add another bowl (the hometown Roady's Humanitarian) to the mix, BSU does not bring much else to the table for the conference right now, and would likely be rejected out-of-hand by the likes of Stanford and/or Cal anyway.
7) Fresno State...Fresno would have a better chance than Boise, and its program is a more vibrant one (especially on the football side) than SDSU, but the Bulldogs would likely be rejected out of hand, for much the same esoteric reasons as the Aztecs.
8) UNLV and Nevada...Highly, highly doubtful. Although UNLV could deliver an intriguing and burgeoning market to the league, and has a glamorous basketball pedigree, it has no football history to speak of, with a marginal stadium facility on the road to Hoover Dam. And we highly doubt Stanford would spend as much as a moment considering the thought of aligning with UNLV (those Palo Alto folks don't know what they would be missing) . Nevada might be a bit more palatable to the academic sorts of the Pac-10 because it has a medical school, but Reno is a much smaller market than Las Vegas, and if the Pac-10 gets to he point where the Rebels and Wolf Pack are the only takers, we'd guess they'd table the expansion talk for the time being. There would figure to be a better chance for Nevada to move into the same MWC as its sister school UNLV in the near future, although the word is that the current WAC schools are so down on the Mountain West's TV deal and marriage to The Mtn. that none (including Boise, Fresno, and Nevada) have any desire to switch in the near future, much preferring their current WAC deal with ESPN.
9) Hawaii...Don't completely discount this one. Hawaii brings a couple of things to the table, not the least of which is an exotic locale that conference coaches can use as a "sell" to recruits who could expect to make at least a couple (in football) or annual (basketball) trips to the islands. Football also gets that extra 13th game for playing games at Hawaii. The Stanfords and Cals of the Pac-10 would also probably not reject UH out of hand on academic grounds, and besides, the thought of Hawaii fits nicely with the progressive political agenda of some Pac-10 institutions, who might look favorably upon an affiliation with the Manoa campus and its unique Polynesian and Pacific Rim flavor. The economics of Hawaii's membership could get a bit problematic for the non-revenue sports, although football would be an easier sell, especially with the bowl game at Aloha Stadium that would likely come along with the Warriors. We also know for a fact that Hawaii has long dreamed of an affiliation with the Pac-10, and though it's still a longshot, we don't think it's the most remote suggestion in our list.