The PAC 11's failed expansion and GU

by opooos on Jun 15, 2010 8:11 AM PDT Comment 13 comments

I got this link from Colorado's SB site, it details the likely new divisions of the new PAC whatever:

http://cbs4denver.com/sports/university.of.colorado.2.1751602.html

I think if the divisions work out like this it will be a net plus for GU. With a PAC 11 north consisting of UW, WSU, OSU, OU, Stanford and Cal there is the possibility that our chief recruiting rivals in the NW would lose some of their appeal. When the Big 12 still had 12 teams they scheduled BBall like so: each school would play its own division rivals twice and the other division once. That meant that a Texas would play the Big 12 north only one time a year. If the PAC 12 (they are supposed to go after Utah) goes the same way, the PAC NW schools are relegated to playing each other twice a year and lose out on any guaranteed trips to LA (a fertile recruiting ground).

This may seem like a small victory (very small, if I am honest) but the alternative of a PAC 16 behemoth was downright frightening to me. While we may not be apart of a MWC BBall conference I think this keeps things balanced on the west coast and allows for GU's footprint to grow for a few more years.

(post bumped from FanPosts) - ZB

This post does not reflect the views of the blog authors or SB Nation.

1 recs | Comment 13 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Agreed and rec'd

by GU.AmericasTeam on Jun 15, 2010 9:05 AM PDT reply actions

This is a solid point

I’ll be very curious to see how it affects how SoCal kids view the “north” schools in the Pac-12.

Like you said, it is not a huge win for Gonzaga but the fact that we’ll be in the LA area every year against LMU is nice and I still think Donny Daniels will give Gonzaga some type of footprint in SoCal. You have to believe that is a big reason Few brought him on.

We’ll see how it all shakes out but thanks for bringing this point up. Excellent Fanpost.

The Slipper Still Fits - SB Nation's home for the Gonzaga Bulldogs!

by Zach Bell on Jun 15, 2010 9:51 AM PDT reply actions

Like Waiting for a Volcanic Eruption

All of these proposals, defections, alleged defections, maneuvering and posturing are certainly something without precedent. How all this helps college sports is beyond me.

It seems the sole issue is $$$$$. Traditions, loyalty and common courtesy are secondary considerations.

Do you think Gonzaga sould try and pull a Texas on the WCC?

mjc

by quidveritas on Jun 15, 2010 3:09 PM PDT reply actions

absolutely

I personally don’t see anything wrong with what Texas did. People won’t like them for it, but if we have an opportunity like that (I doubt we ever will) I would be upset if GU didn’t take advantage of it. I mean how hard has this Coaching Staff and athletic department worked to elevate the play of this university and subsequently this conference? How much money has GU made for the WCC itself and its member schools?

by opooos on Jun 15, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah, well someone has to be on top...and pole position brings in the $$$

I sure am glad it’s Gonzaga but, even though Few & Company deserve a lot of credit , let’s remember that we are in a conference of our own choosing, for now. We have not always been on top and so fortunate.

What would happen to the W.C.C. if we left given the opportunity? Maybe they fold? What about if LMU or San Francisco bolted from conference in their glory days when Gonzaga was at the bottom? And they were the ones looking down their noses at us because they considered us slackers? Only one team at a time can be at the top. And over the years most W.C.C. members have brought in some decent money too.

Just another way of looking at it…And before anyone jumps me and claims I do not want to leave the W.C.C., I actually would like to move. Just wanted to throw in a reminder that things were not always so rosy. It is not possible to maintain this level of success. So enjoy it while it’s here.

Its gonna be gLoRiOUS!!~

by gaz-tastic on Jun 15, 2010 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions

Thats True they Didnt bolt

But times were very different back then. There wasn’t the major money involved in the 1950s (during USF’s run) that is involved now. USF and LMU didn’t have the opportunity to potentially do something that Texas is doing.

Also We have only been a member of the WCC since the 70’s. The WCC used to consist of schools like Pacific, Nevada-Reno and UNLV and then they bolted.

Now before a certain poster on TSSF jumps on this, I will say not for a moment do I feel like we are worthy of our own TV network. But this is still a program that can use extra money and exposure. I feel based on the last 10 years GU is not an aberration but a consistent national power. Without GU the WCC would probably go back to a one bid league instead of now where we are regularly pushing for at least 2 bids. So what the hell . . . I say rock the boat a little and see what happens (oh yeah and this feeling explodes tenfold if the WCC “expands” and adds Seattle U to further dillute this conference).

by opooos on Jun 15, 2010 6:07 PM PDT up reply actions

Ok, I admit I was not around in the 50s...or 60s

So I did not know San Fran was not in the W.C.C. then. Interesting info.

My point I guess was that everyone in conference contributes. There are the haves, have nots, and have mores {Gonzaga right now}. Just because we have been carrying this conference for 10+ years does not mean we always carried it. Did we not need the other teams bringing in the shared money when we at the bottom of the food chain? I was just wondering what might happen to the W.C.C. if Gonzaga were to leave.

As far as expanding and adding Seattle U? To me that would be going backwards. I do not feel they have much of anything to add to the conference.

Its gonna be gLoRiOUS!!~

by gaz-tastic on Jun 15, 2010 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions

sorry if i gave the wrong impression . . .

GU was not in the WCC in the 50s, USF was. All of this info is coming from wikipedia so take it for what its worth i guess.

Anywho, I think if GU were to leave the WCC, they would go back to obscurity (sorry SMC fans I don’t think you can carry the load). They might lose their ESPN deal once it is up . . . who knows? I just feel that if the last few weeks has taught us anything it is that big time college sports are not charities. They are big business and if GU is to stay ahead of the next tidal wave of expansion (which will come) they need to be somewhat forward thinking when it comes to this stuff.

and as far as Seattle U is concerned I think Coach Few and the Administration have made it quite clear that they only want expansion if it will increase the level of play. We’ll see how far that gets us.

by opooos on Jun 15, 2010 8:48 PM PDT up reply actions

What if...

the PAC-11 isn’t done expanding. The Conference chairman said that they would continue to look into expansion. If they bring in Utah as some say they will they will have 12 teams. So I pose the question, What if the PAC-11 wants to bring in some Bball only schools a la the Big East.? If they ask GU to join what do they do?

If Utah leaves the MWC do they pull another WAC team. If that happens the WAC will only have 7 teams (after B. St. and another is gone) Can you have a conference with only 7 schools? Is there a minimum number of schools you must have to stay a conference?

I would love for things to stay the way they are in college sports, but I don’t think this is the end of expension but only the begining.

by suzag on Jun 16, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions

Not going to happen

What if the PAC-11 wants to bring in some Bball only schools a la the Big East.?

They would never do that. The big east is a bit of a mess because they were basketball only (I mean no football) until 1991, and they were raided of their best teams just a few years ago. The PAC 12 is rock solid with about 80 years of tradition, and solid overall athletic/academic institutions. They will never add sport specific schools like Boise St. or Gonzaga.

by spencer peaty on Jun 16, 2010 11:33 PM PDT up reply actions

I was thinking only about boosting their TV network that they want so bad. I don’t think it will happen either, unless their TV network doesn’t bring in the $ they hoped it would.

by suzag on Jun 17, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions