TV markets won't matter much in the future.

If they don't, then neither will college sports.

The Big Ten going to 12 schools is probably the only stimulus that would cause the Pac 10 to voluntarily expand.

If the Big Ten taps Missouri, Colorado would probably be more willing to leave the Big 12, as the Big 12 will have lost most of its hold on the Saint Louis market.

Colorado joining is a given, but I think Colorado State gets the last slot in the Pac 12. This gives the Pac 12 a solid grip on Denver and the rest of the Front Range.

With Colorado and Missouri gone, I think the Big 12 actually will be the one that gets New Mexico. In order to keep Oklahoma and Oklahoma State in the same division, TCU gets the 12th spot over New Mexico State, Louisiana Tech, UTEP, and Houston. The only wildcard would be if Missouri State is ready for FBS, which could open the door for another northern school like Air Force or Wyoming.

The Mountain West, down to six schools and having lost three of its easternmost members, guts the WAC, which fails to gain any interest from the existing membership of Conference USA. Hawaii, Fresno State, Boise State, Nevada, Idaho, and San Jose State all flee the WAC.

Utah State, Louisiana Tech, and New Mexico State join the Sun Belt, which picks up several of the WAC bowls in the process. Denver and New Orleans are readmitted to allow for 4 divisions in basketball and several other sports.

SBC West - USU, NMSU, Denver (no fb), UNT, ULL, ULM, UNO (no fb), LTU
SBC East - Ark St, UALR (no fb), MTSU, WKU, USA, Troy, FIU, FAU

IF the pac ten needed to expand the choice IMO should be BYU and Utah.

However, I think UC San Diego and UC Davis should build up their athletic programs and join the pac ten.

The only thing here is that the Big Ten, if it ever expands is going to add (1) Notre Dame or (2) Syracuse or Rutgers (in that order). Notre Dame is the obvious national play. Outside of the Irish, though, it is much more attractive and likely that the Big Ten would add an eastern travel partner for Penn State - becoming a truly dominant conference in the Northeast is much more valuable (especially with the existence of the Big Ten Network, which is looking for maximum cable household potential) than adding to the margins in the Midwest, which the conference already dominates. Mizzou really only adds the Kansas City market since Illinois already covers St. Louis (maybe not as thoroughly as Mizzou, but the Illini are still a legit "local team" over there). That pales in comparison to the potential of adding New York/New Jersey.

I tend to agree with Illni on the Big Ten avenue. Notre Dame would be their top preference. I also view moving eastward may be a more plausible choice than pursing a Big 12 school. Penn State has often expressed a desire for another eastern school in the conference. Agree, solidifying an eastern presence for TV and marketing would be a driving force among choices.

I am not so sure the Big 12 is so fragile as some may suggest. Missouri does not seem to be a school itching to move and start again in another conference even if it is the Big Ten. Their history and tradition is strong with the Big 12 North schools and the Oklahoma schools. Perhaps a Colorado move to the PAC 10 would be a motive to impact another leaving, but the same question may be asked of Colorado. Colorado has to have a significant incentive to move, and the monetary rewards must look measurably more appealing than what's currently available in the Big 12. Travel is also factored in, though Colorado is also on the fringe, geographically, for the Big 12.

When or if the PAC 10 expands, I believe Utah would be one of the universities they would look at seriously. While BYU presents some more unique issues, they would also be examined due to their overall popularity in the region and their respectable resources.

Other than Notre Dame, there are not enthusiastic options for BCS conferences unless the means and power exist to extract from other BCS conferences. Beyond the ACC raid on the Big East a few years back, the flexibility for similar bold moves among BCS conferences in the near future appear much more constrained. Maybe one or two schools over a long period of time, but probably nothing massive.

I agree the Big Twelve is more stable than most would like to believe. But the SEC is still making more dough, even with the weighted payouts. And a future SEC tv network is going to amplify that more than it alreadly is. I'm sure the conference would love to trade UT and A&M for Miss and Miss State, and the extra money might just make it feasible for the Texas schools.

SEC - $2,415,977 average per team
Big 10 - $2,217,664 average per team
Big 12 - $1,808,869 average per team
Big East - $1,774,628 average per team
Pac 10 - $1,764,701 average per team
ACC - $1,605,304 average per team

In Bowl payouts alone, the SEC made about 600k per team more than the Big Twelve. The groundwork for the SEC's tv network is slowly being laid, and if it's anything like the BTN or .mtn, it'll be profitable if nothing else. Nothing would make a splash more than adding 23 million more tv sets to the equation.

The problem with that is that Tech and Baylor have a lot of important Alumni too. They would punish the university as soon as they were able to do so. I think you could dump Baylor for a school like Arkansas and get away with it --- They have been bad for a long time and there are plenty of Arkansas Alumns down here --- but not both.

(Financially, you can't get Arkansas anyway with the Big 12's revenues.)

Thank you for your kind words. We do disagree on the Colorado thing. The PAC 10 is simply a far superior academic conference than the Big 12. Athletically it is a little better overall than the Big 12. Financially, it is a wash.

I think any BCS university would shell out as much as 10-20 Million in a lawsuit settlement if it meant they could get into a much more respected conference because of what that means to an institutional reputation and a University's endowments.

Regarding the fact that the PAC splits revenue more evenly than the Big 12, that might be a real positive for Colorado. It has been a very long time since Colorado was a national power and their games were in demand. Don't take it as a given that they would lose money in that exchange.

Regarding special deals, I have not suggested any. The PAC 10 membership is the payoff. There are no Notre Dame's in the Western half of the US. BYU and Colorado are as close as the PAC 10 could get and frankly they are more like a lesser rutgers or missouri... They don't need to offer a special deal to convince Colorado to join, and they won't.

I am not so much stating that the PAC 10 WILL immediately expand. I was merely looking at what might happen if they did. The Pac 10 can steal Colorado from the Big 12. If UT, A&M, and OU realize that hurdles will prevent them from ever getting into a true elite conference like the Big 10 or PAC 10 and decide to build their own, grabbing like minded Arkansas and say Colorado, Kansas, Missou, and either Tech or Baylor (to keep the locals from rioting), the PAC 10 loses the Colorado option.

A layout like that easily financially outpaces the SEC and is a much more impressive academic conference than the current B12.

From there, any expansion for the PAC 10 does not --- as pounder suggested --- add new revenue streams.

So expansion might be a pre-emptive strike if the PAC 10 thinks they will eventually need to expand. Right now, every school in the western US wants in to the PAC 10 because it is a better conference than the one they are in. The possibility of that dynamic changing could spur the PAC 10 to make a preemptive offer.

I didn't argue Utah (market the PAC 10 already somewhat owns) and Colorado State (#2 school). I argued two #1 schools in markets they don't touch.

One final thought on CU/UNM over CU/CSU. If I wanted CU I might go to the other B12 schools and say "I am taking CU. In the interest of being neighborly I will take either CSU or UNM as my #12 --- which ever one you don't want." In return for that, a skillfull negotiation could probably sooth over some hurt feelings an eliminate most of the lawsuit dollars.

CU/UNM means the B12 can add CSU and effectively not miss a step as Colorado has been down at the solid to mediocre level for almost a decade now. CU/CSU means the B12 are effectively no longer relevant in the Denver market. That is a big hit. They are locked out for good and UT might take the opportunity to gut the conference and bail.

I think he is actually making a very good point. TV markets were based on broadcast TV. TV is now a cable and satellite medium. It seems like it may just a matter of time before using broadcast DMAs is widely replaced by much more narrow focus advertising. That may really screw up the gravy train.

I don't know exactly how it will work, but I think general nervousness over that is in part fueling the move to conference networks (or as UT's Deloss Dodds recently hinted at the last B12 get together, SCHOOL based networks.)

Long term, I think that is a great option for the PAC 10 with California's growth rate, but neither school is within 15 years of PAC 10 competitiveness.

I've tried to answer the question, "What if they feel a need to expand today." Today, there are solid answers but not great ones.