Utah to Pac 10 - according to sources, and ESPN is reporting it

• j_crazy

  

  Just saw this on ESPN.com
  
  http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5293329
  
  this is likely the final move this year, IMO.
  
  pretty good get for the Pac-10. MWC is taking a huge blow if they ever wanted to be a viable BCS option.
• mattinctown

  This hurts Boise State the most, just joined the MWC in hopes of increasing BCS chances
• Azubuike24

  

  One has to wonder...does the addition of Colorado and Utah and the new PAC 12 actually make the conference stronger than it was with a cohesive 10? I'm not sure it really does. The biggest achievement for the league here is it may have delayed or derailed the MWC's chance of getting a BCS bid. However, I don't think the PAC 12 is a stronger league.
• Al Bundy

  Azubuike24;391780 wrote:One has to wonder...does the addition of Colorado and Utah and the new PAC 12 actually make the conference stronger than it was with a cohesive 10? I'm not sure it really does. The biggest achievement for the league here is it may have delayed or derailed the MWC's chance of getting a BCS bid. However, I don't think the PAC 12 is a stronger league.

  
  I don't think the quality of the conference improves, but they do bring in the Denver and Salt Lake City TV markets. They have every major TV market out west now.
• newarkcatholicfan

  

  Overall I like this move though I can see Utah being a middle of the pack team for the first few years in not long in most sports in this league.
• ts1227

  

  Al Bundy;391805 wrote:I don't think the quality of the conference improves, but they do bring in the Denver and Salt Lake City TV markets. They have every major TV market out west now.

  
  Agreed. They have every major market west of the Texas 10 Conference footprint, and even encroached into it some by grabbing Colorado. They should get a decent TV deal out of it next year.
• j_crazy

  

  I know they "got the SLC TV Market", but in my experience from living out there, more people follow BYU than Utah.
• darbypitcher22

  

  I thought the Pac 10 would have taken Utah and Boise St. before they took Colorado....
• Al Bundy

  darbypitcher22;392003 wrote:I thought the Pac 10 would have taken Utah and Boise St. before they took Colorado....

  
  Boise doesn't generate the $$$$$ of Colorado. Sadly, all of the conference changes come down to $$$$$$$$
• darbypitcher22

  

  I realize this as much as anybody but from a competitive standpoint I think Utah will compete much better year in and year out in certain sports than Colorado will and Boise would have done the same
• TheMightyGators

  Historically, Colorado has been a little bit better of a football program than Utah. It wasn't long ago that Colorado was really good in football. It's only been the last 5-6 years they have been really down. I don't know how they compare in other sports though.
• enigmaax

  j_crazy;391918 wrote:I know they "got the SLC TV Market", but in my experience from living out there, more people follow BYU than Utah.

  
  It is funny, I worked in Salt Lake for a long time and I'd have said the exact opposite based on my experience. I suppose it depends on where you are in town.
• dazedconfused

  

  enigmaax;392236 wrote:It is funny, I worked in Salt Lake for a long time and I'd have said the exact opposite based on my experience. I suppose it depends on where you are in town.

  
  i'm sure when the usc's, oregon's, etc, roll into town, they'll be fully onboard with the utes...byu won't be able to compete with that star power
• sjmvsfscs08

  Solid addition. Utah's program can play with anybody right now; they'll march into the Pac-12 with great élan and knock some heads together. This will only help them become more consistent. As one who believes conferences should have a tight geographic fit, I would've liked for Nevada and Boise State to have been selected but obviously Nevada needs to mature as a program.
  
  I wonder if we'll see the MWC wait for the Texas 10 to implode or whether they'll go snag three teams (Houston, Nevada, Fresno State) and coalesce.
• enigmaax

  sjmvsfscs08;392341 wrote:Utah's program can play with anybody right now; they'll march into the Pac-12 with great élan and knock some heads together.

  
  I'm really interested to see if this is true. I've debated with folks here for several years about these mid-major type programs. I've said that if they wanna be big time, go join a big time conference and see how it works out. If Utah makes a BCS bowl once this move happens, they've definitely earned their spot. Here's a chance to find out whether the week-in and week-out grind of this type of conference really makes a difference.
• 3reppom

  

  enigmaax;392236 wrote:It is funny, I worked in Salt Lake for a long time and I'd have said the exact opposite based on my experience. I suppose it depends on where you are in town.

  
  yeah it doesn't really matter who follows who, rather how easily a conference can get their games televised in a particular market. As a general rule if a conference has a team based in a given market that conference will always take precedent in that market. Look at Cincinnati which has extremely fragmented loyalties with Cincy, UK, Louisville, Notre Dame and Ohio State all having large fan bases in the city, but the 3:30 ABC timeslot goes to the Big East every week except in rare circumstances.
• sjmvsfscs08

  Utah's recent Pac-10 opponents:
  
  2009: @ Oregon, L 24-31
  2008: vs Oregon State, W 31-28
  2007: @ Oregon State, L 7-24
  2006: @ UCLA, L 10-31
  2005: vs Arizona, W 27-24
  2004: @ Arizona, W 23-6
  2003: vs California, W 31-24
  
  Not too shabby at all. Meanwhile Colorado is just shit these days. I was a student last year at Toledo when Toledo absolutely demolished the Buffaloes. the Rockets could've put 80 points up that night if they were determined to do so. That said I have every reason to believe Colorado will turn it around....juuust maybe not with this coach.
• enigmaax

  sjmvsfscs08;392464 wrote:Utah's recent Pac-10 opponents:
  
  2009: @ Oregon, L 24-31
  2008: vs Oregon State, W 31-28
  2007: @ Oregon State, L 7-24
  2006: @ UCLA, L 10-31
  2005: vs Arizona, W 27-24
  2004: @ Arizona, W 23-6
  2003: vs California, W 31-24
  
  Not too shabby at all.

  
  Not too shabby, but nothing spectacular. There's a big difference between being a little above .500 - which these results show - and being undefeated and complaining about not getting a national title shot. Utah may do "okay" in the Pac 10, but if thats all they do it really starts to put the real difference between BCS schedules and non-BCS schedules into perspective. That is what I'm interested in because I've had several debates about whether or not one good win a year really means a team like that deserves to be treated equal to a team playing a full BCS conference schedule.
• sjmvsfscs08

  Well something to consider is that Utah is a midmajor and those not nearly as consistent as the BCS schools. When they are good, they are fantastic and can beat anyone, but when they are bad they are rather mediocre just like everyone else. There's just a lot of fluctuation with midmajors, and Utah is no exception. Boise State is probably the only school that has been consistent all decade.
  
  That said, considering how good that Oregon team was last year, I'd say they were right in the running with the best teams in the conference. It will be interesting to see how Utah's recruiting fares after they join the Pac-10. They're doing all of this with players the Pac-10 schools miss, now they'll begin to be in every conversation.
  
  http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5293939
• enigmaax

  sjmvsfscs08;392925 wrote:Well something to consider is that Utah is a midmajor and those not nearly as consistent as the BCS schools. When they are good, they are fantastic and can beat anyone, but when they are bad they are rather mediocre just like everyone else. There's just a lot of fluctuation with midmajors, and Utah is no exception. Boise State is probably the only school that has been consistent all decade.
  
  That said, considering how good that Oregon team was last year, I'd say they were right in the running with the best teams in the conference. It will be interesting to see how Utah's recruiting fares after they join the Pac-10. They're doing all of this with players the Pac-10 schools miss, now they'll begin to be in every conversation.
  
  http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5293939

  
  Agree with everything you say here. Boise State could very well have beaten any Pac 10 team on a given day last year. Certainly could have contended for a title. The thing is, even great teams can be upset by a good team on the right day. And when you have to play a certain level week in and week out, the chances of that upset are astronomically increased.
  
  See, I expect that USC could have gone undefeated against the WAC last year. They were THAT much better than all of those teams and there really isn't anyone that was close enough to where anything but a monumental upset could derail them. Boise may have been in the same boat. They were THAT much better than the WAC to where they didn't really have to worry about a "trap" game. Now, would Boise have been able to beat Oregon one week, then come back and beat Stanford, Cal, and USC with maybe two of those games being on the road? Completely different story. Even if Boise was the top team in the Pac 10, losing to any of those teams would only be a mild upset and those happen to several good/great teams a year. That is my only beef with the midmajors and all the complaints about equal treatment. It isn't a one game season and now Utah is going to find out what a real grind is.
  
  As for the recruiting, I'm really interested to see how that develops also. As you say, they've won their old conference with players the Pac 10 missed. There's a thought that being in the Pac 10 will automatically help recruiting because they can now sell the additional exposure to potential recruits - basically, they're going to start taking recruits that would've gone to the USCs and Oregons in the past. I wonder if that dynamic will only happen if they compete right away. For example, if they come in and right off the bat are a middle-to-lower-pack program, I can't see how that is going to help their recruiting. At least before, they could sell a winning program with a sprinkle of big time games. If they don't fare well immediately, it seems like they'll be trying to sell a lot of games against big time opponents....that a recruit can expect to lose. Again, it'll be interesting to see where the program is in 10 years after this move.
• sjmvsfscs08

  http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5298238
  
  It's official....if it hadn't been before haha
  
  Right I completely agree enigmaax. I don't think Boise State or Utah had the depth to go a whole season in a BCS conference, but I guess we'll find out. Another think Utah has going for them is their coach, Kyle Wittingham. He's a keeper from all accounts.
  
  What will the Pac-10 look like with divisions?
  
  North Division
  Colorado
  Oregon
  Oregon State
  Utah
  Washington
  Washington State
  
  South Division
  Arizona
  Arizona State
  Cal
  Stanford
  UCLA
  USC
• big_red_drummer

  

  http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/10545/nw-coaches-are-ok-with-north-south-split
  
  http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2010/06/16/pac-10-expansion-splitting-the-divisions/
  
  Based on those blogs and what else we have heard out here, this appears to be the plan (at least for now):
  
  North
  Cal
  Oregon
  Oregon State
  Stanford
  Washington
  Washington State
  
  South
  Arizona
  Arizona State
  Colorado
  UCLA
  USC
  Utah
  
  9 conference games (5 division games + 4 against other division)
• ts1227

  

  With 4 crossovers, they could set 2 as permanent games, and the other 2 rotate between the remaining 4 teams... so you would end up playing every team in the conference at least every other year, and play 7 teams each year.
• sjmvsfscs08

  The California schools would refuse to be split up, so I don't know how that'd work. Cal and Standford love playing Southern Cal annually and UCLA-Cal is a big game too.
• bigkahuna

  I didn't see anyone else mention this, but does anyone else think Boise is kicking itself right now for prejacking their decision?
  
  If they would have waited until now to make a decision, could they have been the 12th PAC team?