Expansion? It's the PAC-10's turn.

I recently did a blog referring to the possible expansion of the Big East and how awesome that would be. Now it's time for me to show you how smart I am by discussing the possible expansion of the PAC-10.

PAC-10 expansion is a bit more unlikely than Big East expansion. Most PAC-10 fans will argue that bringing in two more teams will go against the tradition that the conference has built up. I agree there is a certain air about PAC-10 schools that doesn't exist anywhere else in the West. Bringing in two more teams would somewhat dilute that.

Also, the main reason for expanding would be the implementation of a conference title game to generate more revenue for the conference itself. This argument might not hold up in the PAC-10 because a title game might not be all that more profitable. Unlike the SEC and Big XII, the PAC-10 fan base is not exactly obsessed about it's football. I compare the PAC-10 more to the ACC, and we have seen how much of a struggle that conference is having with it's title game.

Despite these drawbacks, expanding the PAC-10 to allow a conference title game could be beneficial to all of college football.

Here are six possible candidates that I believe would get some consideration if the PAC-10 were ever to expand.

1. Boise St.- The Broncos have been the class of the non-BCS schools of recent years. From 2002-2006, Boise St. won 5 straight WAC titles. Of course, Boise St. is remembered most for knocking off the Oklahoma Sooners in the Fiesta Bowl after a perfect 2006 season.

Boise St. would bring with them a fan base that would rival top PAC-10 programs. Other than USC, California and UCLA, Boise St. might have one of the better fan bases in the PAC-10.

The downside to Boise St. is that they play in a small market. Idaho doesn't exactly scream PAC-10. Also, the blue turf that the Broncos play on would have to go as it is seen as nothing more than a gimmick by the PAC-10 powers.

2.Colorado- A few years back it was reported that the Buffs would welcome a move to the PAC-10 from the Big 12. Colorado might not fit in with the rest of the PAC-10 geographically, but that's been done before (i.e. Penn State in the Big Ten, Arkansas in the SEC, Iowa St. in the Big XII.) Since the Big XII started playing title games back in 1996, Colorado has participated in 4 of them. Also, Colorado would bring a national championship to the PAC-10 with their title in 1990 (shared with Georgia Tech.) Colorado would be able to match the other PAC-10 schools in terms of tradition and name recognition, which would be a big seller.

A drawback for Colorado to join the PAC-10 would be the fact that the Buffaloes will undoubtedly have to pay some sort of fine to the Big XII. The move to the PAC-10 would have to be overwhelmingly positive for Colorado to even consider throwing away money like that.

As a side note, this would allow Colorado, Washington and UCLA to compete for the Neuheisel cup every year. Good stuff.

3.Utah- Utah is a respected state university that would fit the mold of a PAC-10 institution. Also, bringing in Utah would allow the PAC-10 to capture the Salt Lake City market. Since the Mountain West conference came into existence in 1999, the Utes have won 3 conference titles. Also, Utah defeated Pittsburgh after their perfect 2004 season to become the first non-BCS school to win a BCS bowl game.

Utah is always one of the more respected non-BCS schools in the country. However, the Utes have lost some of their luster after the departure of head coach Urban Meyer to Florida.

4.Fresno St.- The Bulldogs already play in a PAC-10 market in Fresno, CA. The ability to keep the geographical boundaries that currently exist would be a big draw for the PAC-10 in regards to Fresno St. The Bulldogs have won three WAC titles under Pat Hill and have always taken the role of fearless underdog when playing against BCS competition.

One thing the Bulldogs lack is a defining win. Fresno St. has had their share of upsets but they have never really captured the college football world like Boise St. and Utah have. Also, lately Fresno St. has been labeled an underachiever and last time I checked the PAC-10 already has a UCLA.

5. BYU- The Cougars have gradually become one of the better non-BCS teams in college football recently. This year BYU is expected to make a run at a BCS bid. If that were to happen, it would greatly improve their stock in this discussion. BYU has won 4 Mountain West conference titles including back to back championships the past two seasons.

The Cougars definitely have the goods on the field, but BYU is not a research institution, which is almost a mandatory requirement for the PAC-10. BYU's religious affiliation may be too much to overcome for them to be seriously considered for the PAC-10.

6. UNLV- The Rebels are easily the least credentialed football team on this list. One thing that UNLV does have that the other schools don't is a very solid basketball program. The b-ball program would help UNLV in the expansion discussion.

Also, UNLV would give the PAC-10 the Las Vegas market. This could either be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how you want to look at it.

UNLV might have the smoothest transition of the 6 schools listed into the PAC-10 because the Rebels roster is loaded with USC transfers.