In a final attempt to put the west coast on the map, the Pac-10 conference has added the University of Colorado and the University of Utah.
However, this switching around of conferences has completely taken away from the idea of the student athlete and turned it into a giant business for each school. Granted the University of Colorado was already a struggling program, and had seen major disappoint over the past few years, including the bust recruit Darrel Scott (who transferred to UCLA after last season), and a measly performance in the Big 12.
What is even more compelling is the idea that the ends justify the means for the Pac-10 inviting so many schools to join their conference: they are desperate for national recognition and money. What a lot of people do not know is that it takes 12 teams in a conference to hold a conference championship game. What comes with this: TV time, an extra game to be played during a season, and a chance to be put on the national stage as a true BCS conference.
The SEC, ACC and Big Ten have dominated the marketing networks for years due to sheer dominance in regards to football. The Pac-10 however, is now the weakest link and is looking for ways to make more money and gain more national recognition. USC finished 7-4 last year, combine the recruiting violations and the end of a dynasty, the west coast is now officially dead in the college sports world. The solution: pick up teams to make a power conference, one that can be reckoned with. And some benefits to that: more networking packages to showcase the Pac-(whatever it will be named) championship, along with a guaranteed spot into a BCS bowl game.
The Pac-10, Utah and Colorado all got something out of this. It’s a two-way street down College Politics Way. Do I support the Pac-10’s major merger: no. Is it inevitable? yes. College football has officially become a business led by the conference committees and board of regents from each school. Let the merger begin.