Widgets Magazine
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: A Look at the new PAC 16

  1. Default A Look at the new PAC 16


  2. #2

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    Can you post a link to your graphic? It's too small to read.

  3. #3

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    All things considered, and if/when it comes to pass, they ought to ditch the PAC name.
    It'll be a wee less Pacific based if things proceed as anticipated.

  4. #4

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    Quote Originally Posted by redrunner View Post
    Can you post a link to your graphic? It's too small to read.
    Here is a link to a lrger version.

    Pac16

  5. #5

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    Thanks bluedog..

  6. #6

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    Yeah, thanks BD.

    They need to update the image of Texas Memorial Stadium since the north end zone was rebuilt and expanded. And Godzillatron isn't in there either.

  7. #7

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinpate View Post
    All things considered, and if/when it comes to pass, they ought to ditch the PAC name.
    It'll be a wee less Pacific based if things proceed as anticipated.
    How about the name BIG PAC?

  8. #8

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    Reminds me of Big Mac. Don't like it. What about United West Conference?

  9. #9

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    I imagine the PAC will remain, and only the numerals change, if only
    because those from the University of Systemic Cheating and the
    others lining the western border will want to keep their conference
    name intact.

    I'll get over the demise of the Big 12.
    I'm not thrilled I need to, but yeah, I'll get over it.

  10. #10

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    "the mean 16"

  11. Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    The conference graphic looks like a gerrymandered congressional district to me. Big PAC may not be so inappropriate.

  12. #12

    Default Re: A Look at the new PAC 16

    With all the financial problems on the West Coast I am starting to think that the PAC 10 expansion is really just an attmept to save that conference from dissolving. I read today where if the Big XII South says No then the PAC 10 would invite Utah and call it quits at 12 teams. This get them a championship game in football, but who would really care.

    Adding Colorado and Utah isn't going to help the PAC 10 raise money or bring about a better TV deal. Colorado was one of the worst performing revenue schools in the Big XII and didn't pull their weight in the Big XII. In reality, the conference is better off without them.

    My guess is the PAC 10 needs the Big XII South far more than Big XII needs the PAC 10. I say invite Arizona and Arizona St to replace Colorado and Nebraska and move OU and OSU to the Big XII North (OU can still play Texas every year but some of the games would count as non-conference games).

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 79
    Last Post: 06-02-2010, 10:29 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO