PAC-10 To Issue Invites - Is this the beginning of Conference Expansion?

[South_Florida_Flip]

Does USF already have a club lax team?

Yes.

http://usflacrosse.ialax.com/

[KB]

Forget about facility upgrades for a second.

I know money doesn't grow on trees, but USF should announce next week that they are starting men's and women's lacrosse programs.  They should drop some decent coin to get a known commodity in coaching circles like the Duke men's coach who was hastily fired when Duke overreacted in the **** hoax debacle (he sued and settled).

Make the announcement, hire a known guy (ladies coach can be a non-splash hire) and get the program tracking before the dominoes fall in the coming months/years.

Does USF already have a club lax team?

http://usflacrosse.ialax.com/

South Florida's Mens Lacrosse team is a Div 1 MCLA team.  The team is a member of the SELC ( South East Lacrosse Conference ) and plays a competitive schedule of NCAA Div II, Div III and MCLA teams.  Though at Club Status, the team is considered, a "virtual varsity" program working towards NCAA Div 1 status.  Please sign up for our newsletter and feel free to contact the coaches or officers with any questions.

[Apis Bull]

And they have the coolest helmets!!

[Guest]

I see the big 10 inviting maryland and unc over syracuse and pitt. 

Maryland might make sense, the Terps are in the AAU and they would get the DC and Baltimore markets that way.  UNC would not add any more cable markets than Syracuse, and Cuse is more of the Big Ten footprint.

If you want to look south Vanderbilt and Georgia Tech are both major city universities in the AAU.

Good read there with the Husker article.

I know that they are expanding for TV purposes, hence a big reason why Delaney said what he did at the end of the Big 10 meetings. His comments alone all but eliminated Syracuse and Pitt from the discussion of expansion (Syracuse won't capture the NY market and the Pitt market is already there with Penn State). ND isn't going, so that would leave Rutgers as the only program I could see leaving.

As Carolina mentioned, any mass chaos is good for USF. If the PAC 10 gets 6 programs, then the Big 10 and SEC will follow and USF will be in a good position for an ACC/Big East conference.

See, and I think you're wrong about Syracuse.  Sure, Syracuse will not capture the New York CITY market -- but it will add markets in Rochester, Syracuse, Binghamton, Buffalo, Watertown, Rome  - even as far east as Schenectady and Albany.  That is a potential for MILLIONS of subscribers.  Syrcause will add enough cable market subscribers to cover the $7 million per year they need to bring to the table.  (All it would take is an increase of 75 cents for 800,000 or so subscribers).

Pittsburgh may be left out, but Connecticut could replace them for the same reasons as Syracuse - a state full (maybe two with Rhode Islanders) of cable subscribers.

I see value with Rutgers and Syracuse but my question when I keep seeing Pitt and UConn is: 1) Will the Big Ten really invite a Non-AAU member in UConn that could be on probation in basketball when all is said and done, 2) What does Pitt bring to the Big Ten that they don't already have in Penn State?

That is my problem with seeing the Big Ten get to 16 (assuming ND is not involved). I can see Mizzou, Rutgers and Syracuse. Then lets say Nebraska.  Then who? Maybe you take Kansas for it's basketball program?  

I don't really think Pittsburgh gets an invitation unless Penn State (and Joe Pa) is pushing them.  It might be a purely political move, not one designed to bring in new markets.

Truthfully, Maryland makes a lot more sense than Pittsburgh.  Like New York and New Jersey, it shares a border with a Big Ten state, so it's not a large reach (like Boston College in the ACC).

I hadn't seen many sources citing Maryland - which could be a telling sign, with Pitt and U Conn out there as a "rope-a-dope."

[BullsFanInTX]

TX,

The MWC is expected to announce BOise State as a member starting in 2011 this summer which would definitly earn them a BCS AQ under the critera according to Jerry Palm, the BCS expert.

As for the ACC and SEC, I don't see them building up until it economically viable.

The reason the PAC 10 is doing this is because their TV contract is garbage. They need these schools to get anywhere.

The Big 10 has a financial stakes in their network and to assure they make money, they have to expand to get that championship game.

I'd bet a lot of money, the SEC doesn't expand for awhile.

The Big East though...stayed tuned...we're going to hear something VERY soon.

Joe, I have read at least 3 articles examining the BCS criteria, and the MWC is not meeting the 3rd criteria (which I think is the average ranking of every team in the conf.) even with the addition of Boise State.  This is due to the atrocious bottom half of the MWC.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/college/os-adelson-college-insider-0531-20100530,0,5483023.column?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+orlandosentinel%2Fsports%2Fcollege+%28OrlandoSentinel.com+-+College+Sports%29

Indeed, the revenue disparity between the AQ and non-AQ conferences stands at about $521 million. But until the revenue distribution changes, even a super-sized Mountain West with Boise State is going to fall short of the millions upon millions upon millions the "big boys" get.

Why? Because right now, a Mountain West featuring Boise State would still fall short of becoming an AQ conference under the BCS guidelines. The bottom MWC teams are simply weighing down the handful of good ones.

[BullsFanInTX]

TX,

The MWC is expected to announce BOise State as a member starting in 2011 this summer which would definitly earn them a BCS AQ under the critera according to Jerry Palm, the BCS expert.

As for the ACC and SEC, I don't see them building up until it economically viable.

The reason the PAC 10 is doing this is because their TV contract is garbage. They need these schools to get anywhere.

The Big 10 has a financial stakes in their network and to assure they make money, they have to expand to get that championship game.

I'd bet a lot of money, the SEC doesn't expand for awhile.

The Big East though...stayed tuned...we're going to hear something VERY soon.

Joe, I have read at least 3 articles examining the BCS criteria, and the MWC is not meeting the 3rd criteria (which I think is the average ranking of every team in the conf.) even with the addition of Boise State.  This is due to the atrocious bottom half of the MWC.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/college/os-adelson-college-insider-0531-20100530,0,5483023.column?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+orlandosentinel%2Fsports%2Fcollege+%28OrlandoSentinel.com+-+College+Sports%29

Indeed, the revenue disparity between the AQ and non-AQ conferences stands at about $521 million. But until the revenue distribution changes, even a super-sized Mountain West with Boise State is going to fall short of the millions upon millions upon millions the "big boys" get.

Why? Because right now, a Mountain West featuring Boise State would still fall short of becoming an AQ conference under the BCS guidelines. The bottom MWC teams are simply weighing down the handful of good ones.

And another one.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/06/02/mountainwest.boise/index.html?eref=si_latest

To be clear, adding Boise would not guarantee the Mountain West a spot at the table. The BCS's qualifying formula stipulates that a new automatic entrant must rank among the top six leagues in three different categories -- average ranking of its highest-rated team from each season; percentage of teams in the final Top 25; and the average ranking amongst all league teams. As of now the Mountain West sits comfortably among the top six in the first two criteria but a distant seventh in the third, and even by adding Boise would not gain enough ground.

[tampabull]

http://ESPN.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/22838/ohio-state-prez-delany-discussed-texas

I guess ohio state and delany were talking texas.  I have a feeling the dominoes are going to start falling shortly.

[2000bull]

don't know if anybody saw this, but colorado AD says report has some validity

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/03/colorado-ad-says-pac-10-report-has-some-validity-to-it/

[Carolina_Bull]

don't know if anybody saw this, but colorado AD says report has some validity

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/03/colorado-ad-says-pac-10-report-has-some-validity-to-it/

Looks like the Big 10 might have overplayed their hand dragging this thing out for the free press.  Also looks like the SEC is getting a reality check.

When the Big 12 is picked clean, the SEC and Big 10 will clean out the ACC. . . . . . . . for the first time in this mess, I'm starting to  think we'll come out ahead in this deal.

[Carolina_Bull]

http://ESPN.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/22838/ohio-state-prez-delany-discussed-texas

I guess ohio state and delany were talking texas.  I have a feeling the dominoes are going to start falling shortly.

In a way, the most credible article I've read with regard to Pac10 rumors. . . . . . . looks like Texas' "tech problem" might be as beneficial to USF as Virginia's "tech problem" was.