Continuing previous thought......


IN regards to Colorado State.....I think they'd love to go the Pac 10, but.....

Why CSU as opposed to Utah (great for basketball) or Hawaii or SDSU or even New Mexico (attendence for football could be issue).....other than the fact that if Colorado goes, CSU is the natural choice since Pac 10 teams come in twos:

Oregon - Oregon State
Washington - Washington State
Arizona - Arizona State
USC - UCLA
Stanford - Cal
;D Fresno St. - San Diego St. ;D
I swear I've never seen a conference so perfectly balanced for season ending rival to rival play!!

the pac ten would never take fresno state because it accepts partial qualifiers. but you're onto something -- if the pac ten were to expand, it would want two regionally convenient schools. colorado-colorado state, for instance. in a pig's eye, but just for instance.

they have already made it clear they won't take utah and byu. maybe if hawaii-hilo could move up to 1-a and get themselves a football team... ::)

Actually FS no longer accepts PQs, but I do agree that FS and SDS would most likely never be allowed in the PAC without intervention from the state legislature.

SCVD...I wish! But it is nice to dream.

stevus, the arguments for/against the schools you mentioned are covered in the Pac-10 expansion thread.

That would be a great day. Maybe as the money becomes more and more of an issue, schools like baylor and vandy will be squeezed out by their conferences.

I think:

Tulsa
TCU
SMU
Rice
Baylor
Tulane
Vandy

is certainly the start of what looks to be a stable conference with shared goals and good academics anyway.

Take TCU out, and I think you're on to something.