ORD_Buckeye;1659308; said:Honestly, I'm not too worried about this. Pac 10's television contract isn't any better than that of the Big 12, and Texas wouldn't be given the disproportionate split that they now get.
On the academic side, and I do believe that some influence in Texas' decision will come from a desire to placate a faculty that is really [censored]ed off at the administration right now, the Pac 10 does have Stanford, Cal, UCLA and Washington. They also have Arizona State, Washington State and Oregon State with no formal academic consortium to match the CIC.
As I detailed in an earlier post, travel distances are actually worse than to Big Ten campuses.
So, the Pac 10 offers far less money, less of an academic component and greater travel distances. The only positive that I can see in their pitch would be better Olympic Sports--not that the Big Ten is bad in this regard given the last 20 years of Directors' Cup standings.
I agree with all of that.
It wouldn't just be distances though, it would be time zones are also a problem. Pac-10 road games would be two hours later, and they play a lot of night games - I stay up and watch 'em. Half of the Big Ten is in the central time zone with most of Texas.
The only advantage I see in the Pac 10 for Texas is baseball. Baseball is a big deal for Texas, but it's not what's going to drive their decision.
Upvote
0