Is BYU relegated to no higher than 3rd place in the Pac-10 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

MikeWaters · 12-03-2007, 04:17 PM

as stated by Indy?

If BYU and Utah were added to the Pac-10 and two divisions were created:

North
BYU
Utah
Washington
WSU
Oregon
Oregon St.

South
USC
UCLA
Cal
Stanford
Arizona
Arizona St.

BYU would play all divisional foes, plus 3 from the Pac-12 South.

I don't think is is beyond reason that BYU could have won the Pac-12 North this year, and certainly would be in the mix to win in next year, esp. with a favorable schedule re: opponents in the Pac-12 South.

What I am saying is that 2nd Place in the Pac-12, given the relative weakness of the teams in the north, is quite reasonable.

Tex · 12-03-2007, 04:26 PM

2nd place may have been possible this year, given how many upsets there were and how crazy the shuffling has been. Given the tumult of the last, say, 10-15 years, I'm not sure how likely getting above 3rd regularly would be.

I do think recruiting would change for the better, and that's an "x" factor in making this guess.

HuskyFreeNorthwest · 12-03-2007, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

as stated by Indy?

If BYU and Utah were added to the Pac-10 and two divisions were created:

North
BYU
Utah
Washington
WSU
Oregon
Oregon St.

South
USC
UCLA
Cal
Stanford
Arizona
Arizona St.

BYU would play all divisional foes, plus 3 from the Pac-12 South.

I don't think is is beyond reason that BYU could have won the Pac-12 North this year, and certainly would be in the mix to win in next year, esp. with a favorable schedule re: opponents in the Pac-12 South.

What I am saying is that 2nd Place in the Pac-12, given the relative weakness of the teams in the north, is quite reasonable.

First I think that the P10 is at least 5+ years from even thinking about expanding.

Second if it ever does happen you will never see the divisions like you had them. The rest of the conf would never let UCLA and USC be in the same division. They would split the rivals so the divisions would be balanced and everyone would still get their trip to SoCal.

North
Arizona
USC
CAL
Oregon St
WSU
Utah

South
ASU
UCLA
Stanford
Oregon
Washington
BYU

MikeWaters · 12-03-2007, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HuskyFreeNorthwest

First I think that the P10 is at least 5+ years from even thinking about expanding.

Second if it ever does happen you will never see the divisions like you had them. The rest of the conf would never let UCLA and USC be in the same division. They would split the rivals so the divisions would be balanced and everyone would still get their trip to SoCal.

North
Arizona
USC
CAL
Oregon St
WSU
Utah

South
ASU
UCLA
Stanford
Oregon
Washington
BYU

you are nuts if you think they will put intra-state rivals in different divisons (Arizona, Oregon, Washington).

HuskyFreeNorthwest · 12-03-2007, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

you are nuts if you think they will put intra-state rivals in different divisons (Arizona, Oregon, Washington).

Why? You can still play your rival every year as your crossover game.

You are nuts if you think the 8 schools not in SoCal are going to expand the conference without having at least one of USC/UCLA in their division.

So I guess there is one of the big answers to why expansion is at best a pipe dream in the P10.

TripletDaddy · 12-03-2007, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

you are nuts if you think they will put intra-state rivals in different divisons (Arizona, Oregon, Washington).

One of the biggest hurdles in splitting the PAC is that NONE of the schools wants to be left out of the same divisions as SC/FUCLA.

MikeWaters · 12-03-2007, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HuskyFreeNorthwest

Why? You can still play your rival every year as your crossover game.

That's not how it works. Teams want schedules to have parity. If your cross-division rival always sucks (i.e. Baylor or Washington State) then you have an advantage in scheduling.

Nebraska and OU used to be a rivalry of sorts. They didn't play this year.

HuskyFreeNorthwest · 12-03-2007, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

That's not how it works. Teams want schedules to have parity. If your cross-division rival always sucks (i.e. Baylor or Washington State) then you have an advantage in scheduling.

Nebraska and OU used to be a rivalry of sorts. They didn't play this year.

Oh like the entire Big 12 North?

Splitting your rival would provide some balance. Your version of the P12 north would clearly be a weak link. It would lead to a WSU being undefeated having never played a decent team one year, ala Kansas this year.

creekster · 12-03-2007, 06:33 PM

I talked to a guy in my office about this. He is a Stanford grad and he and his buddies actually like the idea of including BYU/Utah but they want to do East and West divisions splitting rivals so that you can play your rival in the championship game. Then every school gets 5 in division games, one rival game and 2 rotating out of division games. Yes, he was serious.

MikeWaters · 12-03-2007, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekster

I talked to a guy in my office about this. He is a Stanford grad and he and his buddies actually like the idea of including BYU/Utah but they want to do East and West divisions splitting rivals so that you can play your rival in the championship game. Then every school gets 5 in division games, one rival game and 2 rotating out of division games. Yes, he was serious.

2 teams facing each other in 2 consecutive weeks. Did you tell him he is an idiot?

12-03-2007, 04:17 PM	#1
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	Is BYU relegated to no higher than 3rd place in the Pac-10 as stated by Indy? If BYU and Utah were added to the Pac-10 and two divisions were created: North BYU Utah Washington WSU Oregon Oregon St. South USC UCLA Cal Stanford Arizona Arizona St. BYU would play all divisional foes, plus 3 from the Pac-12 South. I don't think is is beyond reason that BYU could have won the Pac-12 North this year, and certainly would be in the mix to win in next year, esp. with a favorable schedule re: opponents in the Pac-12 South. What I am saying is that 2nd Place in the Pac-12, given the relative weakness of the teams in the north, is quite reasonable.

12-03-2007, 04:26 PM	#2
Tex Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,596	2nd place may have been possible this year, given how many upsets there were and how crazy the shuffling has been. Given the tumult of the last, say, 10-15 years, I'm not sure how likely getting above 3rd regularly would be. I do think recruiting would change for the better, and that's an "x" factor in making this guess. __________________ "Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?" "And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..." - Cali Coug "Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got." - Brigham Young

12-03-2007, 06:33 PM	#9
creekster Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: the far corner of my mind Posts: 8,711	I talked to a guy in my office about this. He is a Stanford grad and he and his buddies actually like the idea of including BYU/Utah but they want to do East and West divisions splitting rivals so that you can play your rival in the championship game. Then every school gets 5 in division games, one rival game and 2 rotating out of division games. Yes, he was serious. __________________ Sorry for th e tpyos.